TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Adams v. New York, Ontario and W. Railway Co.

In the Matter of the Claim of Ida Adams Et Al., Against New York, Ontario and Western Railway Company, Respondent. State Industrial Commmission, Appellant

Adams v. New York, 115 N.E. 1051 (N.Y. 1917)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
New York Court of Appeals · State Highest Courts
Decided
January 30, 1917
Judges
Cuddeback, Pound
Citations
115 N.E. 1051220 N.Y. 5791917 N.Y. LEXIS 1030
Headnotes
Workmen’s Compensation Law — section 87 requiring deposit to meet future payments does not apply to award made to widow. Section 27 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law (Cons. Laws, cli. 67), which requires a deposit in the state fund by an employer and self-insurer of money to meet future payments of an award does not apply to an award made to a widow since it does not content-plate and fails to provide for weighing or determining the contingency of the widow’s remarriage, which would bring about a cessation of payments.
Summary
Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered November 14, 1916, which reversed an order of the state industrial commission requiring the defendant to deposit in the state fund moneys sufficient to meet future payments of award.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Cuddeback

Cuddeback, J.

The order appealed from which required the deposit in the state fund by the employer and self-insurer of the money to meet the future payments of an award was properly reversed at the Appellate Division, for the reason that section 27 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law (Cons. Laws, ch. 67), which requires such deposit, does not apply to an award made to a widow. It does not contemplate and fails to provide for weighing or determining the contingency of the *581 widow’s remarriage — which would bring about a cessation of the payments to her.

The order appealed from should be affirmed, with costs against the state industrial commission.

Dissent — Pound

Pound, J.

(dissenting). It must he remembered that we are construing a workmen’s compensation law with its usual incidents. The scheme of the statute is reasonably comprehensive. Section 25 provides that the commission may, in the interest of justice, award to the injured person, or to the beneficiaries in case of death, a lump sum in lieu of periodical payments. Section 27 covers cases only where periodical payments are awarded and payment thereof is assumed by the state fund by a deposit of the present value thereof in trust. One lump sum payment is made under section 25 and the case is closed. Periodical payments are continued under section 27 for the full period of liability. Death is a personal injury within the meaning of the statute (Crapo v. City of Syracuse, 183 N. Y. 395 ) which makes it possible, under section 27, to compute the present value of future payments, “with due regard to life contingencies.” The contingency of remarriage in case of widows comes plainly within the spirit of the statute as well as its letter, and the statute clearly means that due regard must be given to it. Every reason for permitting the present value of all future payments to be computed in cases of life interests applies to life interests subject to the contingency of remarriage. Actuarial science determines the probabilities of remarriage from experience tables, as the expectation of life is determined. The industrial commission may (§ 67) adopt reasonable rules to carry into effect the provisions of the law and the collection, maintenance and disbursement of the state insurance fund. The Northampton table of mortality rests upon the observations of the population of a single English town. It was long in use under the General Rules of Practice. The same is true of the Carlisle table from which the value of life estates is computed in our *582 courts to this day. (General Rules of Practice, LXX.) In the present perfected stage of vital statistics the probable number of widows of a given age out of a given number who will remarry in a given period may be determined with essential accuracy as any other life contingency may he determined. The remarriage table of the Dutch Royal Insurance Institution, which governs the awards and payments under the provisions of the Dutch Compensation Law, was properly adopted by the commission as the only experience table of the kind applicable to our conditions, and it will serve until it is corrected by local experience.

The order of the Appellate Division should he reversed and that of the industrial commission affirmed.

Hisoook, Oh. J., Chase, Collin, Hogan and Cardozo, JJ., concur with Cuddebaok, J.; Pound, J., reads dissenting memorandum.

Order affirmed, etc.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 12 cases

View all citing references →
1918: 11919: 21920: 11928: 11929: 11930: 11931: 11934: 11937: 21946: 119182026peak 1919 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Surace v. Danna161 N.E. 315 (N.Y. 1928)
  2. Claim of Wagner v. Wilson & Co.167 N.E. 174 (N.Y. 1929)
  3. Claim of Brophy v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America241 A.D. 306 (1934)
  4. Cogdill v. Aetna Life Insurance2 P.2d 292 (Mont. 1931)
  5. Bacon v. United Electric Railways Co.150 A. 818 (R.I. 1930)
  6. Claim of Lauritzen v. Terry & Tench Co.193 A.D. 809 (1920)

Most recent

  1. Claim of Szuba v. George Laub's Son's271 A.D.2d 396 (1946) · Dissent
  2. Claim of Voelker v. Jos. Rosenberg's Sons251 A.D. 50 (1937) · Dissent
  3. Pacenza v. Booth & Flinn, Ltd.250 A.D. 225 (1937)
  4. Claim of Brophy v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America241 A.D. 306 (1934)
  5. Cogdill v. Aetna Life Insurance2 P.2d 292 (Mont. 1931)
  6. Bacon v. United Electric Railways Co.150 A. 818 (R.I. 1930)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Crapo v. City of Syracuse, 76 N.E. 465 (N.Y. 1906) 66

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list