Legal Opinion
Garbutt v. Stoll
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided February 2, 1939No. Docket No. 35, Calendar No. 40,200PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtNorth, J.
Plaintiff, Mrs. Byrd Grarbutt, seeks to recover compensation for the death of her son, George Garbutt, Jr., upon whom she claims to have been totally dependent. The deputy commissioner found plaintiff was totally dependent and entered an award of $18 per week. Tbe award was affirmed by tbe department and defendants appeal to this court.
It is admitted that George Garbutt, Jr., suffered an accidental injury in tbe course of his employment on June 26, 1936, and that he died as a result of such injury on the same day. The only question presented is whether plaintiff was totally dependent on her…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- McKesson-Fuller-Morrisson Co. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
- Bloomington-Bedford Stone Co. v. PhillipsIndiana Court of Appeals · 1917
- Blue Diamond Coal Co. v. FrazierCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1929
- Maryland Casualty Co. v. CampbellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1925
- McLaughlin v. Antrim County Road CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1934
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Weems v. Chrysler Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1995
- Larkin v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1944
- Dunnavant v. Newman Tire Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of Virginia · 2008
- Thomas v. Raleigh Gas Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- Rose v. Paper Mills Trucking Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1973
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.