Opinion
November, 1918.
Award affirmed. All concurred, except H.T. Kellogg, J., dissenting on the ground that claimant was not acting in the course of his employment when injured while doing work he was not employed to do.
From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research
Matter of Rendino v. Continental Can Company
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Nov 1, 1918
186 App. Div. 924 (N.Y. App. Div. 1918)
Summaries of
Matter of Rendino v. Continental Can Company
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Nov 1, 1918
186 App. Div. 924 (N.Y. App. Div. 1918)
Case details for
Matter of Rendino v. Continental Can Company
Case Details
Full title:Before STATE INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION, Respondent. In the Matter of the Claim…
Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Date published: Nov 1, 1918
Citations
186 App. Div. 924 (N.Y. App. Div. 1918)
Citing Cases
Hamberg v. Flower City Specialty Co.
Under such circumstances the courts have held that a claimant, or a claimant's intestate, was not acting in…