
    In the Matter of the Claim of Rose Briskin, Appellant, against Morris Hyman et al., Respondents. State Industrial Board, Respondent.
    
      Workmen’s Compensation Law — claim dismissed on ground of insufficiency of evidence that at time of accident deceased was engaged in regular course of employment.
    
    
      Matter of Briskin v. Hyman, 203 App. Div. 275, affirmed.
    (Argued April 18, 1923;
    decided May 8, 1923.)
    Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered November 15, 1922, reversing an award of the state industrial board and directing dismissal of a claim made under the Workmen’s Compensation Law. Claimant’s decedent, the temporary or substitute manager of a garage in Brooklyn, died as the result of burns received 'in a fire which destroyed the garage at about two-thirty a. m. There was evidence that decedent went to the garage on the night in question to sleep there rather than take the long trip to his home in The Bronx and back again the next morning. The Appellate Division held that there was no evidence to support the finding that at the time of the accident the deceased was engaged in the regular course of his employment.
    
      Jeremiah F. Connor for appellant.
    
      Alfred W. Meldon and Joseph Force Crater for respondents.
   Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Hiscock, Ch. J., Hogan, Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin, Crane and Andrews, JJ.  