From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Boehm v. D.A. Sokol Hall Holding Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Nov 17, 1948
274 App. Div. 954 (N.Y. App. Div. 1948)

Summary

In Boehm v. D.A. Sokol Hall Holding Corp., 274 App. Div. 954, 83 N.Y.S.2d 729 (1948) compensation was allowed to a porter who was paid for his regular hours of employment but who was injured while working after hours for which he received only refreshments as compensation. This authority seems to fall in that class of cases in which compensation is allowed for injuries during uncompensated after-hours work on the ground that a compensated employee should not be deprived of protection as a penalty for willingness to do extra work without extra compensation.

Summary of this case from Hill v. King

Opinion

November 17, 1948.

Appeal from Workmen's Compensation Board.

Present — Hill, P.J., Heffernan, Foster, Russell and Deyo, JJ.


The appeal is based solely on the ground that at the time of the accidental injury there was no relationship of employee and employer between the decedent and alleged employer. Decedent was employed as a casual porter. The accident happened after his regular hours of employment had terminated, but there was proof that he often performed some services after hours and received remuneration therefor by way of refreshments. The board found that such consideration was sufficient to support the relationship of employee and employer. Award unanimously affirmed, with costs to the Workmen's Compensation Board.


Summaries of

Matter of Boehm v. D.A. Sokol Hall Holding Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Nov 17, 1948
274 App. Div. 954 (N.Y. App. Div. 1948)

In Boehm v. D.A. Sokol Hall Holding Corp., 274 App. Div. 954, 83 N.Y.S.2d 729 (1948) compensation was allowed to a porter who was paid for his regular hours of employment but who was injured while working after hours for which he received only refreshments as compensation. This authority seems to fall in that class of cases in which compensation is allowed for injuries during uncompensated after-hours work on the ground that a compensated employee should not be deprived of protection as a penalty for willingness to do extra work without extra compensation.

Summary of this case from Hill v. King
Case details for

Matter of Boehm v. D.A. Sokol Hall Holding Corp.

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of ANTONIE BOEHM, Respondent, against D.A…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: Nov 17, 1948

Citations

274 App. Div. 954 (N.Y. App. Div. 1948)

Citing Cases

Matter of Kleid v. Carr Bros

Per Curiam. Since this unwitnessed accident took place during working hours in a place where Kleid's work…

Hill v. King

In Johnson v. Industrial Comm., 88 Ariz. 354, 356 P.2d 1021 (1960) prisoners working for a private…