Criminal Law · MBE-tested

In the Matter of the Claim of Gus Kocko, Respondent, against Harris Coal Company, Inc., and Another, Appellants. State Industrial Board, Respondent

236 A.D. 859·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1932·NY

Brief incoming

Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.

Opinion

In the Matter of the Claim of Gus Kocko, Respondent, against Harris Coal Company, Inc., and Another, Appellants. State Industrial Board, Respondent. [MAJORITY — Rhodes, J. (dissenting).] Rhodes, J. (dissenting). I dissent and vote to affirm the entire award on the ground that by the provisions of section 13 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law the Board is authorized to allow fees and other charges for medical and surgical treatment; the hospital has made a charge therefor for which the Board has made an award. I do not think the question as to whether or not the services of the surgeons were rendered without charge to the hospital is material. It seems to me that section 13 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law is controlling, and that we are not concerned with the provisions of the city charter which are attempted to be invoked. Amd. by Laws of 1927, chap. 553.— [Rep.