New York Court of Appeals, 1938

Matter of Bollard v. Engel

Matter of Bollard v. Engel
New York Court of Appeals · Decided October 18, 1938 · <italic>Per Curiam.</italic>
17 N.E.2d 130; 278 N.Y. 463; 1938 N.Y. LEXIS 1327 (North Eastern Reporter, Second Series)
Matter of Bollard v. Engel

Cases that cite this one

33 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

We think the evidence warranted tfie finding that the employment was not interrupted while the deceased was returning from supper on the occasion in question, (Cf. Matter of Johnson v. Smith, 263 N. Y. 10; Matter of Goldman v. John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co., 276 N. Y. 582.) The employer’s first report of injury was not without probative force merely because it was not made upon personal knowledge (Gangi v. Fradus, 227 N. Y. 452, 456, 457).

The order should be affirmed, with costs.

Crane, Ch, J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hubrs, Loeghran, Finch and Rjkpey, JJ., concur.

Order affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.