Legal Opinion
Szold v. Outlet Embroidery Supply Co.
New York Supreme Court
Decided June 2, 1936PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtShientag, J.
This motion to dismiss the complaint for insufficiency raises certain questions concerning the scope and validity of amendments to the Workmen’s Compensation Law enacted in 1935. *913These amendments deal generally with the authorization of physicians by the Industrial Commissioner to treat workmen’s compensation cases, the regulation of such practice and the respective rights of employee and employer to the choice of physicians. The new sections, 13-a to 13-j, of the Workmen’s Compensation Law contain many detailed provisions, with the scope and interpretation of which we are not here concerned.…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- New York Central Railroad Company v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Watson v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
- Surace v. DannaNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Matter of Jensen v. . Southern Pacific Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1915
- Lawrence v. Board of Registration in MedicineMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- In re the Estate of PurtillNew York Surrogate's Court · 1981
- Reddy v. PegramAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1938
- Carmody v. City of St. PaulSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1940
- Cortland Community Re-Entry Program, Inc. v. Consolidated Claims Services, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 2002