Case ID: ny_235/html/0577-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In the Matter of the Claim of George W. Smith, Respondent, against Metal Stamping Company et al., Appellants. State Industrial Board, Respondent.
    
      Workmen's compensation — jurisdiction of state industrial board to reopen case where claim has been disallowed and after new hearing allow compensation — sufficiency of notice.
    
    
      Smith v. Metal Stamping Co., 204 App. Div. 850, affirmed.
    (Argued March 1, 1923;
    decided March 20, 1923.)
    Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered November 28, 1922, affirming an award of the state industrial board made under the Workmen’s Compensation Law. The questions were as to whether the state industrial board had jurisdiction to reopen a case after dismissal of the claim for insufficiency of notice and after rehearing grant an award; also as to the sufficiency of the notice under section 18 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law.
    
      Clarence B. Tippett for appellants.
    
      Carl Sherman, Attorney-General {E. C. Aiken of counsel), for respondent.
   Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Hogan, Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin, Crane and Andrews, JJ.