From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Piusinski v. Transit Valley Country Club

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Mar 13, 1940
259 App. Div. 765 (N.Y. App. Div. 1940)

Summary

In Piusinski v. Transit Valley Country Club, 259 App. Div. 765, 18 N.Y.S.2d 316, affirmed in 283 N.Y. 674, 28 N.E.2d 401, a golf caddy sustained an injury while engaged in a practice game with other caddies. His injury was held compensable even though he was not required to play.

Summary of this case from Geary v. Anaconda Copper Min. Co.

Opinion

March 13, 1940.


Appeal from an award made against employer and insurance carrier for compensation to claimant for disability. Claimant was employed as a golf caddy. He was injured while engaged in a practice game with other caddies, and as a result of such injury lost an eye. The sole question involved is whether the accident arose out of and in the course of his employment. Although not required to play, a fair inference of fact may be drawn from the evidence that he and other caddies were encouraged to play each Monday morning. Such practice was not only for their own amusement but tended to make them more efficient caddies. Moreover, under a rule of the employer, they were then under the rule and supervision of the caddy master. Under such circumstances claimant was not outside of his employment. ( Matter of Holst v. New York Stock Exchange, 252 App. Div. 233; Matter of Kenny v. Lord Taylor, Inc., 254 N.Y. 532.) Award affirmed, with costs to the State Industrial Board. Hill, P.J., Bliss, Heffernan and Foster, JJ., concur; Crapser, J., dissents and votes to reverse the award and dismiss the claim on the ground that the accident did not arise out of and in the course of his employment.


Summaries of

Matter of Piusinski v. Transit Valley Country Club

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Mar 13, 1940
259 App. Div. 765 (N.Y. App. Div. 1940)

In Piusinski v. Transit Valley Country Club, 259 App. Div. 765, 18 N.Y.S.2d 316, affirmed in 283 N.Y. 674, 28 N.E.2d 401, a golf caddy sustained an injury while engaged in a practice game with other caddies. His injury was held compensable even though he was not required to play.

Summary of this case from Geary v. Anaconda Copper Min. Co.
Case details for

Matter of Piusinski v. Transit Valley Country Club

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of TEDDY PIUSINSKI, Respondent, against TRANSIT…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: Mar 13, 1940

Citations

259 App. Div. 765 (N.Y. App. Div. 1940)

Citing Cases

Matter of Tedesco v. General Elec. Co.

Such, however, was a rule of that corporate entity, and it, solely, provided the facility and afforded the…

Matter of Dearing v. Union Free School, Tonawanda

In several cases this issue has been so determined. A locker boy, permitted to use a swimming pool maintained…