Miller v. Bill Miller's Riviera

Citation90 A.2d 889,21 N.J.Super. 112
Decision Date06 August 1952
Docket NumberNo. A--181,A--181
PartiesMILLER v. BILL MILLER'S RIVIERA, Inc.
CourtNew Jersey Superior Court – Appellate Division

Joseph Lieberman, Newark, argued the cause for appellant (Greenbaum & Greenbaum, Newark, on the brief).

Arthur F. Mead, Newark, argued the cause for respondent (Cox & Walburg, Newark, attorneys).

Before Judges SMALLEY, PROCTOR and HANEMAN.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

SMALLEY, J.S.C.

This is a workmen's compensation case. The Bureau dismissed the claim, and since the accident in which the deceased was injured and subsequently died occurred in the State of Florida, the appeal is direct to this court from the determination of the Bureau.

The sole question to be determined is, did the decedent's death result from the accident which arose out of and in the course of decedent's employment with the respondent-corporation. There is little dispute as to many of the facts. The application of the pertinent rules of law to these facts, however, furnish the real dispute for determination.

The petitioner is the widow of Joseph Miller. Joseph Miller was a brother of William Miller who was and is president and the principal stockholder of Bill Miller's Riviera, Inc., a corporation which operates a restaurant night club in Fort Lee in this State. This corporation is the respondent.

The deceased lived with his wife, the petitioner, and two children in Brooklyn, New York. He was employed as a night steward at the respondent's place of business. His duties have been described as 'to make sure that everything ran right at the Riviera in the kitchen.'

On or about the 4th day of November 1950, decedent left his home for a vacation in Florida. He accompanied Abe Vine, his brother-in-law, and the Vine family in the Vine automobile. Abe Vine was also employed by the respondent company. The vacation period extended approximately six weeks, the Riviera then being closed, and to open on New Year's Eve.

Some time before December 19, 1950, William Miller, who had also come to Florida in his automobile, and the deceased met in Florida. There was conversation between both Millers and some instruction for the deceased to drive the personal automobile of William Miller back to New York or to Fort Lee. On December 19, 1950, Abe Vine, driving his own automobile, and the deceased, driving his brother's personal automobile, started back on their trip north. They stopped on the way up between Miami and St. Augustine, namely, at Cocoa, Florida, and a purchase of six boxes of fruit for shipment to the Riviera at Fort Lee, was made. It is to be noted that Abe Vine was the purchasing agent of the respondent corporation and made the purchase at William Miller's direction, although no particular direction as to the place of purchase was given.

Both Vine and the deceased stayed at St. Augustine overnight and left the next morning around 5 o'clock. Vine was operating his automobile and the deceased was operating his brother's, William Miller's, automobile. Vine saw a car coming in the opposite direction with one headlight. He pulled over to the shoulder of the road. This oncoming car, however, came into collision with the automobile operated by the decedent, Joseph Miller. It is admitted that Miller expired on December 23, 1950 by reason of the injuries sustained in this collision.

William Miller testified that his brother was on the payroll of the respondent corporation from the time that he, Joseph Miller, left Miami. There is some dispute as to this by Dolan, a bookkeeper of the respondent corporation, who testified that Vine and the deceased automatically were placed on the payroll of the respondent the week ending December 25, 1950, even though the bookkeeper, Dolan, would not know of the whereabouts of Vine or the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Crilly v. Ballou
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Michigan
    • 15 Julio 1958
    ...time during which he is employed, and at a place where he may reasonably be during that time.' See Miller v. Bill Miller's Riviera, Inc., 21 N.J.Super. 112, 116, 90 A.2d 889 (App.Div.1952); Schultz v. Henry V. Vaughans Sons & Co., 24 N.J.Super, 492, 498, 94 A.2d 873 (Cty.Ct.1953). In Belyus......
  • 77 Hawai'i 100, Tate v. GTE Hawaiian Telephone Co.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Hawai'i
    • 10 Octubre 1994
    ......v. Miller, 23 Md.App. 271, 326 A.2d 186 (1974), aff'd, 275 Md. 192, 338 A.2d 71 ... Page 1253 . [77 Hawai'i 107] v. Bill Miller's Riviera, Inc., 21 N.J.Super. 112, 90 A.2d 889 (1952) (denying ......
  • Secor v. Penn Service Garage
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • 27 Septiembre 1955
    ...time during which he is employed, and at a place where he may reasonably be during that time.' See Miller v. Bill Miller's Riviera, Inc., 21 N.J.Super. 112, 116, 90 A.2d 889 (App.Div.1952); Schultz v. Henry V. Vaughans Sons & Co., 24 N.J.Super. 492, 498, 94 A.2d 873 (Cty.Ct.1953). In Belyus......
  • Reilly v. Weber Engineering Co.
    • United States
    • New Jersey County Court
    • 16 Octubre 1969
    ...time during which he is employed, and at a place where he may reasonably be during that time.' See Miller v. Bill Miller's Riviera, Inc., 21 N.J.Super. 112, 116, 90 A.2d 889 (App.Div.1952); Schultz v. Henry V. Vaughans Sons & Co., 24 N.J.Super. 492, 498, 94 A.2d 873 (Cty.Ct.1953). In Belyus......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT