1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 20 F.Supp.
  5. 20 F.Supp. 920 (1937)
 

KOLENKO v. CERTAIN-TEED PRODUCTS CORPORATION

20 F.Supp. 920 (1937)

KOLENKO v. CERTAIN-TEED PRODUCTS CORPORATION.

District Court, W. D. New York.

October 14, 1937.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

William L. Clay, of Rochester, N. Y., for plaintiff.

Hubbell, Taylor, Goodwin, Nixon & Hargrave, of Rochester, N. Y. (Caspar V. Baltensperger, of Rochester, N. Y., of counsel), for defendant.

BURKE, District Judge.

This is an action to recover for personal injuries and one that is commonly designated as a silicosis case. The complaint contains two causes of action. The first cause of action is based upon failure upon the part of the defendant, an employer, to comply with certain provisions of the Labor Law (Consol.Laws, c. 31 [section 299]) enacted for the benefit of employees, relating to ventilation, heating, and humidity of factories and work rooms...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases