Legal Opinion
Ward & Gow v. Krinsky
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided June 5, 1922No. 343Published
1Opinion of the Court 1
259 U.S. 503 (1922)
WARD & GOW
v.
KRINSKY ET AL.
No. 343.
Supreme Court of United States.
Argued December 14, 1921.
Decided June 5, 1922.
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT, OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.
Mr. Herman S. Hertwig for plaintiff in error.
Mr. E. Clarence Aiken, with whom Mr. Charles D. Newton, Attorney General of the State of New York, was on the brief, for the State Industrial Commission, defendant in error.
2Opinion of the Court · PitneyJustice Pitney
The New York Workmen's Compensation Law of 1913-1914 [Laws 1913, c. 816; Laws 1914, cc. 41 and 316] sustained as constitutional against attacks based…
Also in this document: Dissent.
3Cases cited13 opinions
- New York Central Railroad Company v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Mountain Timber Company v. State of WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Middleton v. Texas Power & Light Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Jeffrey Manufacturing Co. v. BlaggSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Arizona Employers' Liability CasesSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.