Legal Opinion

Queck-Berner v. MacY

New York Court of Appeals

Decided June 2, 1925PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLehman, J.

The plaintiff was injured on June 28, 1919, while employed by the defendant upon the defendant’s private country estate or home, Chilmark Farm. The defendant in answer to the complaint pleaded as a separate defense that the defendant and the plaintiff by their joint election became subject to the provisions of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, and that the liability prescribed in said act is exclusive.

At the trial it was stipulated that the defendant was “ duly and lawfully covered by Workmen’s Compensation Insurance for all employees at Chilmark Farm, the private home of V. Everitt Macy, near…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Nishman v. De MarcoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
  2. Warney v. Board of Education of School District No. 5New York Court of Appeals · 1943
  3. DeAntonis v. CatalanoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1939
  4. Murphy v. Elmwood Country Club, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1944
  5. Murray Realty Co. v. Regal Shoe Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1934

1 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