Legal Opinion

Van Tassell v. Manhattan Electrical Supply Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided December 15, 1913Published

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the City Court of the city of New York overruling plaintiff’s reply as frivolous and directing judgment for the defendant if plaintiff failed to serve a reply within a specified time.

1Opinion of the CourtBijur, J.

This action is brought by an employee against an employer to recover for negligence in an accident which occurred in Jersey City. The defense replied to set up the Workmen’s Compensation Act of New Jersey. In the reply plaintiff denied knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the New Jersey statute.

The learned court below cites Olson v. Singer Mfg. Co., 143 App. Div. 142, as controlling authority. Counsel points out that, as appears from another opinion *127in that case, reported in 151 App. Div. 516, it is claimed that plaintiff was a resident of New Jersey; and seeks to…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Kirschbaum v. . EschmannNew York Court of Appeals · 1912
  2. Olsen v. Singer Manufacturing Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1911
  3. Olsen v. Singer Manufacturing Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1912

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

Powered by the Exa API