Hyperlawhypertext legal database Claim of McMahon v. Bailey Clock Manufacturing Co. 16 A.D.2d 861

← Cases

Claim of McMahon v. Bailey Clock Manufacturing Co.

16 A.D.2d 861 Court N.Y. App. Div. Decision date 1962-05-18 English

Contents

Majority

p. 861
(A) In the Matter of the Claim of Kenneth McMahon, Respondent, v. Bailey Clock Manufacturing Company, Inc., Appellant, and Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company, Respondent. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent. (B) In the Matter of the Claim of Jack Sturm, Respond
p. 862
ent, v. Bernie’s Express et al., Appellants. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent. (C) Alexander Dziobecki, Appellant, v. Dominick D’Ambrosi, Respondent, et al., Defendants. (D) In the Matter of the Claim of Margaret Howard, Appellant, v. New York Hospital et al., Respondents. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent. (E) Michael Mitulinski, Respondent, v. Anna D. Mitulinski, Appellant.

[In each action] Appeals dismissed, without costs, unless appellants shall file and serve records, briefs and notes of issue for the September 1962 Term on or before August 1, 1962, in which event motions denied.