Flanagan v. Charles E. Green & Son
Supreme Court of New Jersey
1Per curiam
This is a workmen’s compensation case. The bureau found for the petitioner and the Common Pleas affirmed. On certiorari the Supreme Court affirmed the Common Pleas except as to the measure of compensation, and the employer appeals.
The first point urged is that there was no proof of an accident arising out of and in the course of employment. This claim is untenable. It rests on a factual distinction that is obviously frivolous. The employe, as had been the custom, had his lunch on the employer’s premises. When he had finished, he proceeded towards another part of the room fox the purpose of…
2Cited by15 opinions
- Hornyak v. the Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1973
- Mallette v. Mercury Outboard Supply CompanyTennessee Supreme Court · 1959
- Saintsing v. Steinbach CompanyNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1949
- Vélez v. Comisión Industrial de Puerto RicoSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1964
- Boyle v. BremeSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1983
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.