MATTER OF DORMAN v. New Process Gear Div. Chrysler Corp.
MATTER OF DORMAN v. New Process Gear Div. Chrysler Corp.
35 N.Y.2d 975
Cases that cite this one
7 later published cases cite this decision.
- Claim of Pearson v. New York City Transit Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1989)
- Claim of Hernandez v. Carpet (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1982)
- Burlingame v. Mobil Chemical Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1978)
- Claim of Macinski v. Village of Johnson City (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1977)
- Claim of Zengotita v. New York Telephone Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1977)
- Claim of Orientale v. Marcus Associates, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1976)
- Claim of Dapp v. New York State Liquor Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1975)
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
In the Matter of the Claim of Martha Dorman, Respondent,
v.
New Process Gear Division Chrysler Corporation, Appellant. Workmen's Compensation Board, Respondent.
Court of Appeals of the State of New York.
George R. Wolff for appellant.
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney-General (Jorge L. Gomez, Ruth Kessler Toch and Daniel Polansky of counsel), for respondent.
Concur: Chief Judge BREITEL and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER and FUCHSBERG. Taking no part: Judge COOKE.
Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.