From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Claim of Lapinsky v. Ardom Bake Shop, Inc.

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jan 23, 1964
196 N.E.2d 737 (N.Y. 1964)

Opinion

Argued January 8, 1964

Decided January 23, 1964

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department.

Theodore T. Weiser, Allen Redlich and Powell Cooper for appellants.

Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney-General ( Daniel Polansky and Paxton Blair of counsel), for Workmen's Compensation Board, respondent.

No appearance for claimant-respondent.


Order affirmed, with costs to respondent Workmen's Compensation Board; no opinion.

Concur: Chief Judge DESMOND and Judges DYE, FULD, BURKE and SCILEPPI. Judge VAN VOORHIS dissents and votes to reverse and to dismiss the claim upon the ground that it is barred, as matter of law, by section 40 of the Workmen's Compensation Law. Taking no part: Judge BERGAN.


Summaries of

Claim of Lapinsky v. Ardom Bake Shop, Inc.

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jan 23, 1964
196 N.E.2d 737 (N.Y. 1964)
Case details for

Claim of Lapinsky v. Ardom Bake Shop, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of HARRY LAPINSKY, Deceased, Respondent, v…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jan 23, 1964

Citations

196 N.E.2d 737 (N.Y. 1964)
196 N.E.2d 737
247 N.Y.S.2d 388

Citing Cases

Claim of Yannon v. New York Telephone Co.

This does not mean that the testimony of recognized experts should be rejected where their views are…