Legal Opinion
Claim of Meyer v. A. Hollander & Son, Inc.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 28, 1954PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBergan, J.
The controversy is between carriers. There is no doubt that there was an accident on February 21, 1946, when respondent Employers Mutual was on the risk. Claimant was struck by a pipe, fell and injured his shoulder and sustained a subdeltoid bursitis. On October 18, 1946, he suffered a strain shovelling coal which aggravated the pre-existing condition. The same carrier was then on the risk and no question is raised about these being accidents.
The finding of the board as to the third accident, chargeable to the new carrier, appellant Liberty Mutual, is that “ Due to his strenuous work and…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Claim of Borra v. Siwanoy Country ClubAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1952
- Claim of Ussach v. Carolee Shops, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1953
- Claim of Kobinski v. George Weston, Ltd.New York Court of Appeals · 1951
- Claim of Pioli v. Crouse-Hinds Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1952
- Claim of Katz v. Francis H. Leggett & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1953
3Cited by2 opinions
- Claim of Leroy v. Estate of TompkinsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1965
- Claim of Rosenberg v. Scintilla DivisionAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1960