Legal Opinion
Bomba v. Borowicz
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 22, 1942PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCarswell, J.
Frank Borowicz operated a restaurant in Brooklyn, employing plaintiff Bomba to serve at tables. There also worked for him, doing similar work, his wife, hereinafter referred to as “ Mary.” Mary had a dual status, that of employee and wife of Frank. We are concérned with her only as an employee, On June 25,1941, while Bomba and Mary were *199engaged in doing restaurant work, a controversy arose. The trial court has found on adequate evidence that Mary and Frank Borowicz, herein referred to as “ Frank ” engaged in a quarrel relative to details of work in the restaurant; that Bomba, as a consequence…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Hogle v. H. H. Franklin Manufacturing Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1910
- Swinarton v. Le BoutillierNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1894
- Robinson v. Melville Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
- Arlington Hotel Co. v. TannerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1914
- McCarty v. MitchellMississippi Supreme Court · 1934
3Cited by4 opinions
- Gibson v. HelmsNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1963
- Najera v. Southern Pacific Co.California Court of Appeal · 1961
- Durandette v. City of Syracuse Fire DepartmentAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- Zoccano v. Long Island Rail RoadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1947