Legal Opinion

Claim for Benefits under Article 18 of the Labor Law, Made by Levine v. Aluminum Cooking Utensil Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided January 25, 1940PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Claimant entered into a written contract with appellant to act as a distributor of appellant’s goods. The claimant agreed to begin his efforts to sell the goods at *1024once, not to requisition them from appellant unless he had received actual orders, to assume responsibility for expense in connection with certain hinds of orders, to make a report each week of his activities, to give a bond and upon discontinuance of the contract to account for deposits received by him on goods undelivered. The contract provided that the company reserved no direction or control with respect to his activities other…

2Cited by11 opinions

  1. In re Ted Is Back Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1984
  2. Moorman Manufacturing Co. v. Iowa Unemployment Compensation CommissionSupreme Court of Iowa · 1941
  3. Department of Labor & Industry v. Aluminum Cooking Utensil Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  4. In re the Hearing of Electrolux Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1941
  5. In re the Claim for Benefits under Article 18 of the Labor Law Made by AlfordAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1940

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API