Miller v. National Cabinet Co.
New York Court of Appeals
8 N.Y.2d 277, 204 N.Y.S.2d 129, 168 N.E.2d 811 (1960)
- Written by Tanya Munson, JD
Facts
Jacob Miller died from leukemia in 1950 after working as a piano or cabinet finisher for five different employers for more than 20 years. After his death, Jacob’s widow, Ms. Miller (plaintiff), filed a workmen’s-compensation claim against Mr. Miller’s previous employers, including National Cabinet Company (defendant). Ms. Miller claimed that Mr. Miller’s leukemia was caused by exposure to a chemical called benzene, or benzol, that was contained in varnish removers used by each of the employers that Mr. Miller had worked for in his career. The referee who heard the workmen’s-compensation proceeding relied on a physician’s report that there was no known cause for leukemia, Mr. Miller’s personal physician’s refusal to express an opinion as to whether Mr. Miller’s leukemia was caused by his employment, and a pathologist’s testimony that the factors that prolong or shorten leukemia were uncertain to conclude that it had not been established that Mr. Miller’s death was caused by exposure to benzene. The Workmen’s Compensation Board reversed the referee, finding that Mr. Miller developed leukemia as a result of his exposure to benzene while working for National Cabinet Company. The Workmen’s Compensation Board’s opinion was based on Dr. Reznikoff’s expert-witness testimony that the incidence of leukemia is high in patients who have been exposed to benzene, even though he did not have statistics to support this statement. Dr. Reznikoff said he believed it was possible that Mr. Miller’s leukemia was a result of exposure to benzene.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Van Voorhis, J.)
Dissent (Dye, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.