In re the Claim of Cohen
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Dissent
Harvey, J. (dissenting).
We respectfully dissent.
By a written contract in which both parties stipulated that claimant would become an independent contractor, claimant undertook to act as a sales representative of Blinder, Robinson & Company, Inc., a stockbroker. Generally speaking, the contract did not provide any control over claimant’s activities *688other than the control necessitated by securities laws and regulations. Claimant was paid no salary and had no drawing account. He received a percentage of the broker’s commissions and was free to discount his commission at his own option in dealing…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- In re Ted Is Back Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1984
- American Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. State Tax CommissionNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- In re 12 Cornelia Street, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1982
- Matter of Sullivan Co., Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1942
- In re Ted Is Back Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.