Case Name: In the Matter of the Claim of Ewald Schmidt, Respondent, against Wolf Contracting Co., Inc., et al., Appellants; State Industrial Board, Respondent; In the Matter of the Claim of George Knoob, Respondent, against Leon Neon Service Corp., et al., Appellants; State Industrial Board, Respondent; In the Matter of the Claim of Albert Van Gorder, Respondent, against Binghamton State Hospital et al., Appellants; State Industrial Board, Respondent; In the Matter of the Claim of Walter A. Marowski, Respondent, against Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., Inc., Appellant; State Industrial Board, Respondent
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1945-10-11
Citations: 294 N.Y. 973
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of the Claim of Ewald Schmidt, Respondent, against Wolf Contracting Co., Inc., et al., Appellants. State Industrial Board, Respondent. In the Matter of the Claim of George Knoob, Respondent, against Leon Neon Service Corp., et al., Appellants. State Industrial Board, Respondent. In the Matter of the Claim of Albert Van Gorder, Respondent, against Binghamton State Hospital et al., Appellants. State Industrial Board, Respondent. In the Matter of the Claim of Walter A. Marowski, Respondent, against Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., Inc., Appellant. State Industrial Board, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 294
Pages: 973–974

Head Matter:
In the Matter of the Claim of Ewald Schmidt, Respondent, against Wolf Contracting Co., Inc., et al., Appellants. State Industrial Board, Respondent. In the Matter of the Claim of George Knoob, Respondent, against Leon Neon Service Corp., et al., Appellants. State Industrial Board, Respondent. In the Matter of the Claim of Albert Van Gorder, Respondent, against Binghamton State Hospital et al., Appellants. State Industrial Board, Respondent. In the Matter of the Claim of Walter A. Marowski, Respondent, against Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., Inc., Appellant. State Industrial Board, Respondent.
Submitted October 1, 1945;
decided October 11, 1945.
Edward R. Finch for motion.
No one opposed.

Opinion:
Motions denied, with $10 costs and necessary printing disbursements, upon the ground that appeals lie as of right.