Case ID: ny_228/html/0509-01.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 Max Abromowitz against Hudson View Construction Company et al., Appellants. State Industrial Commission, Respondent.
    
      Abromowitz v. Hudson View Construction Co., 188 App. Div. 356, affirmed.
    (Argued January 6, 1920;
    decided January 20, 1920.)
    Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the. Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered July 9, 1919, affirming an award of the state industrial commission made under the Workmen’s Compensation Law. Claimant, while removing awnings from an apartment house, known as No. 885 Riverside Drive, New York city, owned by the appellant Hudson View Construction Company, lost his balance and fell from the third floor to the ground, sustaining injuries. Prior to the accident claimant had been employed by one Feinberg. The appellant Hudson View Construction Company had several thousand awnings which they wanted removed from their several buildings, including the one on which claimant was injured, and applied to Mr. Feinberg for a man to remove them. Mr. Feinberg testified that he was asked to remove the awnings, and said that he would recommend a man who would take down all their awnings at the rate of ten cents apiece; that he saw the claimant and told him that he had a job for him at the Hudson View Construction Company; that he had made the price ten cents apiece and that he should go and look over the job and see if he would take it on. The insurance carrier for the Hudson View Construction Company took the position before the commission that they were not hable for two reasons, first, that the claimant was not in the employ of the Hudson View Construction Company as an employee, and second, that claimant was an independent contractor.
    
      John N. Carlisle and Alfred W. Andrews for appellants.
    
      Charles D. Newton, Attorney-General (E. C. Aiken of counsel), for respondent.
   Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Chase, Collin, Cardozo, Pound, Crane and Andrews, JJ.