Claim of Ardolino v. Ierna
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the CourtDavis, J.
The controversy is between the employer and insurer on the question of coverage —■ there being no dispute as to compensable injury.
The employer named in the policy was the copartnership firm consisting of Frank Ierna and Joseph Venezino, engaged in the contracting business of plastering. The policy was issued February 25, 1925, to remain in force one year., An initial premium of eighty-four dollars was paid in May, 1926. The remaining sum was to be determined by an audit of the employer’s payroll.
Two or three months after the policy was issued, Frank Russo bought out the interest of Venezino…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Hartigan v. . Casualty Co. of AmericaNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
- Matter of Aioss v. SardoNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Claim of Aioss v. SardoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1928
- Jacobs v. Maryland Casualty Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1921
- Jacobs v. . Maryland Casualty CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1922
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- McKinney v. Truck Insurance ExchangeMissouri Court of Appeals · 1959
- In re the Claim for Benefits under Article 18 of Labor LawAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1941
- Close-Smith v. ConleyDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1964
- Frisch v. LiebowitzCivil Court of the City of New York · 1976
- Lee v. J. H. Lee & SonMichigan Court of Appeals · 1976
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.