
    In the Matter of the Claim of Nellie S. Small, Respondent, against Gibbs Press, Inc., et al., Appellants. The State Industrial Board, Respondent.
    
      Workmen’s compensation — master and servant — bookkeeper and superintendent of production who also held office of secretary of corporation killed in course of his employment —• defense to claim for compensation that he was an executive officer and had not elected coverage under Workmen’s Compensation Law — statute so requiring not applicable to claim governed by policy issued before statute went into effect.
    
    
      Matter of Small v. Gibbs Press, Inc., 222 App. Div. 699, affirmed.
    (Argued March 27, 1928;
    decided April 10, 1928.)
    Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered December 7, 1927, unanimously affirming an award of the State Industrial Board made under the Workmen’s Compensation Law. Claimant’s husband, while in the course of his employment, was struck by an automobile and died from the injuries received. He was employed by a corporation, engaged in the printing business, as bookkeeper and superintendent of production and received a fixed salary for his services. During the course of his employment he had been appointed secretary to the corporation, but he held no stock therein, had no authority to sign checks and had received no increase in his salary on such appointment. The defendants contended that claimant’s intestate was an executive officer, and that the claim for compensation is barred by reason of the failure of the decedent to make an election to be brought within the coverage of the Workmen’s Compensation Law, and also by reason of the fact that his wage value was not separately stated and added to the valuation of the payrolls upon which the premium was computed as required by subdivision 6 of section 54 of that statute, as amended by chapter 258 of the Laws of 1926.
    
      
      Jeremiah F. Connor for appellants.
    
      Charles B. Brophy and John G. Jackson for claimant, respondent.
    
      Albert Ottinger, Attorney-General (E. C. Aiken of counsel), for respondent.
   Order affirmed, with costs. Held, that this claim is governed by the terms of the policy as issued on March 1, 1926, and that the statute of 1926, chapter 258 (Workmen’s Compensation Law, § 54, subd. 6) is inapplicable thereto.

Concur: Cardozo, Ch. J., Pound, Crane, Andrews, Lehman, Kellogg and O’Brien, JJ.  