Legal Opinion

Claim of Watford v. Continental Can Co.

New York Court of Appeals

Decided December 22, 1975PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Memorandum. The issue consistently and persistently *215raised before the Workmen’s Compensation Board and before the courts is that the subsequent accident of 1967, although caused in part by the earlier 1959 accident, was substantially caused by the conditions of employment at the time of the second accident. On that basis claimant argued and still argues that he is entitled to compensation at the rate applicable at the time of the second accident. On this record however, we would conclude that "the present disability exists by reason of the two accidents” and the compensation should be…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Claim of Anderson v. Babcock & Wilcox Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1931
  2. Matter of Phillips v. . Holmes Express CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1920

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Claim of Caiazza v. Eastman Kodak Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
  2. Claim of Homrighouse v. Cornell UniversityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
  3. Coakley v. General Motors Corp. Harrison Radiator DivisionAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API