From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Complitano v. Steel Alloy Tank Co.

Supreme Court of New Jersey
Mar 20, 1961
34 N.J. 300 (N.J. 1961)
Download
PDF
Check
Treatment

Summary

In Complitano v. Steel & Alloy Tank Co., 34 N.J. 300, 168 A.2d 809 (1961), we found compensable an injury sustained in an after-hours softball game held away from the employer's premises based on the employer's ties and the event.

Summary of this case from Goulding v. NJ Friendship House
See 3 Summaries

Opinion

Argued March 7, 1961 —

Decided March 20, 1961.

Appeal from Superior Court, Appellate Division.

Mr. Louis C. Jacobson argued the cause for the appellant.

Mr. Isidor Kalisch argued the cause for the respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is reversed for the reasons expressed in the dissenting opinion of Judge Conford in the Appellate Division.

HALL and HANEMAN, JJ., vote to affirm the judgment for the reasons expressed in the majority opinion of Judge Foley.

For reversal — Chief Justice WEINTRAUB, and Justices JACOBS, FRANCIS, PROCTOR and SCHETTINO — 5.

For affirmance — Justice HALL and HANEMAN — 2.

Summaries of

Complitano v. Steel Alloy Tank Co.

Supreme Court of New Jersey
Mar 20, 1961
34 N.J. 300 (N.J. 1961)

In Complitano v. Steel & Alloy Tank Co., 34 N.J. 300, 168 A.2d 809 (1961), we found compensable an injury sustained in an after-hours softball game held away from the employer's premises based on the employer's ties and the event.

Summary of this case from Goulding v. NJ Friendship House

In Complitano v. Steel Alloy Tank Co., 34 N.J. 300, 168 A.2d 809 (1961), the New Jersey Supreme Court reversed the denial of benefits for the reasons set forth in Judge Conford's dissent in Complitano v. Steel AlloyTank Co., 63 N.J. Super. 444, 164 A.2d 792 (1960).

Summary of this case from Smith v. Union Bleachery/Cone Mills

In Complitano, supra, the Supreme Court, by adopting Judge Conford's dissent, concluded that the employer's sponsorship of the teams "was motivated, in part, by the desire for better management relations with the employees engaged in the sponsored activity", 63 N.J. Super. at 467 and that, "There is nothing insubstantial about the commercial value of that kind of good will in today's labor-management climate."

Summary of this case from Russell v. Merck Co., Inc.
Case details for

Complitano v. Steel Alloy Tank Co.

Case Details

Full title:DOMINICK COMPLITANO, PETITIONER-APPELLANT, v. STEEL ALLOY TANK CO.…

Court:Supreme Court of New Jersey

Date published: Mar 20, 1961

Citations

34 N.J. 300 (N.J. 1961)
168 A.2d 809

Citing Cases

Salierno v. Micro Stamping Co.

We must approach this issue with the established tenet that the act should be given a liberal interpretation…

Goulding v. NJ Friendship House

Id. at 593-94, 147 A.2d 783. In Complitano v. Steel & Alloy Tank Co., 34 N.J. 300, 168 A.2d 809 (1961), we…

25 Citing Cases