Legal Opinion
In Re the Claim of Cohen
New York Court of Appeals
Decided February 6, 1986PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the memorandum of the Appellate Division (112 AD2d 687). We add only that unlike Matter of 12 Cornelia St. (Ross) (56 NY2d 895), the evidence here indicates the employer was able to exercise control over the activities of its salespersons beyond the requirements of applicable governmental regulation.
Concur: Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Meyer, Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone and Hancock, Jr.
2Cases cited2 opinions
- In re 12 Cornelia Street, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1982
- In re the Claim of CohenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
3Cited by10 opinions
- In re LuffAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- In re CobbAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- In re WapnickAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- In re the Claim of NeilAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- In re the Claim of SortinaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.