National Zinc Company v. Hainline
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
1Opinion of the Court
BERRY, Justice.
The present proceeding was instituted under the provisions of the Occupational Disease Amendment to the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 85 O.S.Supp., 1959, Sec. 3, Sub-divisions 7 and 16.
Claimant is a laborer, 55 years of age, who from April, 1936, until some ten months prior to his discharge, worked in close proximity to zinc-processing equipment at petitioner’s smelter in Bartlesville, Oklahoma. When increasing weakness prevented him from performing regular duties in the production department, he was assigned, in March, 1957, to lighter work in the bathhouse of the plant where he…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Nease v. Hughes Stone Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1925
- Giambattista v. Thomas A. EdisonNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1954
- Weimer v. Sauder Tank Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1959
- Cupit v. Dancu Chemical CompanySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1957
- Utah Const. Co. v. BergArizona Supreme Court · 1949
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Beaudry v. Winchester Plywood CompanyOregon Supreme Court · 1970
- Wade Lahar Construction Company v. HowellSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1962
- Blackwell Zinc Company v. ParkerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1965
- Walston v. Burlington IndustriesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
- Star Printery Company v. PitmanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1962
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.