Legal Opinion
Claim of Amoroso v. Tubular & Cast Products Manufacturing Co.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided November 21, 1963PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Order affirmed, without costs. In our view there was no substantial evidence before the board upon which an award could be legally predicated. (See Matter of Miller v. National Cabinet Co., 8 N Y 2d 277; Matter of Riehl v. Town of Amherst, 308 N. Y. 212.)
Concur: Judges Fuld, Van Voobhis, Bubke and Scileppi. Judge Fosteb dissents in the following opinion in which Chief Judge Desmond and Judge Dye concur.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Claim of Riehl v. Town of AmherstNew York Court of Appeals · 1954
3Cited by3 opinions
- Bolger v. Chris Anderson Roofing Co., Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1971
- Bolger v. Chris Anderson Roofing Co., Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1970
- Matter of Murphy v. New York State Cts.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2022