Milrose Co., Inc. v. Unemployment Comp. Comm'n
| Decision Date | 13 May 1941 |
| Docket Number | No. 246.,246. |
| Citation | 126 N.J.L. 441,19 A.2d 892 |
| Parties | MILROSE CO., Inc., et al. v. UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION COMMISSION. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Certiorari proceeding by the Milrose Company, Inc., and others, against the Unemployment Compensation Commission of New Jersey, to review the determination and finding of the Commission denying the application of the Milrose Company, Inc., and others for the refunding to them of certain assessments paid the Commission for employers' contributions under the Unemployment Compensation Law, N.J.S.A 43:21-1 et seq.
Determination and finding reversed.
Argued January term, 1941, before BODINE and PORTER, JJ.
Kipp, Ashen & Kipp, of Rutherford (Oscar R. Wilensky, of Passaic, of counsel), for prosecutors.
Charles A. Malloy, of Trenton (Herman D. Ringle, of Trenton, of counsel), for defendants.
This writ of certiorari brings before us for review the determination and finding of the Unemployment Compensation Commission, defendant, dated September 5, 1940, in which it denied the application of Milrose Co., Inc., Steinberg Dress Shop, Inc., and Joseph Steinberg trading as Steinberg Dress Shop, prosecutors, for the refunding to them of certain assessments paid the defendant for employers' contributions under the Unemployment Compensation Law, N.J.S.A. 43:21-1 et seq., for the period ending January 1, 1940.
These facts are not in dispute. It appears that Milrose Co., Inc., was a domestic corporation organized in 1923, composed of Joseph Steinberg, President, Dora Steinberg, Treasurer, and Milton J. Steinberg, Secretary. Its purpose and sole function was the holding of title to certain real property and it was engaged in no other business and had no employees other than the named officers, none of whom received any compensation for services except the secretary. Steinberg Dress Shop, Inc., was a domestic corporation organized in 1930. Its officers were the same individuals as in the Milrose Co., Inc., who held corresponding offices. Steinberg Dress Shop, Inc., employed not more than three individuals, none of whom were officers or stockholders in either corporation. Both of these corporations were dissolved January 1, 1939 and the assets were acquired by Joseph Steinberg trading as Steinberg Dress Shop.
The defendant commission made an assessment against the prosecutors for employers' contributions upon the theory that both corporations were subject employers under the statute, N.J.S.A. 43:21-19(h). Subdivision (h) (1) of this section defines an employer as an employing unit which "has or had in employment, eight or more individuals * * *". Subdivision (h) (4) of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kellogg v. Murphy
... ... Doniphan Tel. Co., 147 S.W.2d 616. There is no bill of ... C. H ... Unemployment Insurance Service, Mo., sec. 8062. If the ... J. Meyer & Company v. Unemployment Comp. Comm., 348 Mo. 147, 152 ... S.W.2d 184; ... 709, 15 ... S.E.2d 4; Milrose Co., Inc., v. Unemployment Comp ... Comm., 126 ... ...
-
Maryland Unemployment Compensation Board v. Albrecht
... ... State. Howes Brothers Co. v. Massachusetts Unemployment ... Compensation ... 154, 16 A.2d 252; ... Milrose Co. v. Unemployment Compensation Commission, ... 126 ... ...
-
Feldman v. Administrator, Unemployment Compensation Act
...for assessment of contributions and is no authority for the contruction claimed by them. Nor are Milrose Co. v. Unemployment Compensation Commission, 126 N.J.L. 441, 19 A.2d 892, and Jack Ulmer, Inc. v. Daniel, 193 S.C. 193, 7 S.E.2d 829. Not only did the context of the statutes construed d......
-
Fleming Hospital v. Williams
...contribution, and deprive many employees of the benefits intended by the Act." And in the case of Milrose Co. v. Unemployment Compensation Commission, 126 N.J.L. 441, 19 A.2d 892, 893, the Supreme Court of New Jersey in discussing an identical statute say: "* * * This section is called the ......