Legal Opinion
Calhoun v. West End Brewing Co.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided June 27, 1945PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Per curiam
The defendant has no interest in the relationship between the plaintiff and the insurance carrier under the Workmen’s Compensation Law. If the defendant is liable it must pay the amount of the medical expenses to one or the other, and its only interest is to find out if the plaintiff has the right to sue it for these expenses so that it will not have to pay twice.
*400Prior to the amendment of 1937 the injured employee in his action against a third party could not recover for medical expenses which were neither incurred nor paid by him. (Zurich G. A. & L. Ins. Co. v. Childs Co., 253 N. Y. 324,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Matter of Berkovitz v. . Arbib HoulbergNew York Court of Appeals · 1921
- Laird v. . CartonNew York Court of Appeals · 1909
- Zurich General Accident & Liability Insurance v. Childs Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1930
- Hession v. Sari CorporationNew York Court of Appeals · 1940
- Claim of Wolkenstein v. Luminart Lampshade Products, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1942
3Cited by20 opinions
- Castleberry v. Hudson Valley Asphalt Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979
- Claim of Mlodozeniec v. Worthington Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1959
- Landon v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1952
- Moeller v. Associated Hospital ServiceNew York Court of Appeals · 1952
- Horsey v. Stone & Webster Engineering Corp.District Court, W.D. Michigan · 1958
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.