Legal Opinion
McFadden v. Six Companies, Inc.
Arizona Supreme Court
Decided September 30, 1935No. Civil No. 3623PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
■ ROSS, J.
— The petitioner, Patrick McFadden, being dissatisfied with the compensation awarded him for an industrial accidental injury, has brought the decision of the Industrial Commission here for review.
On January 10, 1934, at Boulder Dam, while working for Six Companies, Inc., muck or slush, consisting of dirt, cement, lime and perhaps sulphur, was splashed into his eyes. The treatment by the employer’s local doctors was to wash the eyes and to apply to the left eye a pad. The right eye was but slightly hurt and needed no other medical attention. The treatment of washing the left eye and…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Zagar v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1932
- Kilpatrick v. Hotel Adams Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1933
- Scott v. L. E. Dixon Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1934
- Muehlebach v. Dorris-Heyman Furniture Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1934
- Wise v. Six Companies, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 1934
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Steward v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1949
- Scott v. Alabama MacHinery and Supply Co.Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1974
- Pima County Board of Supervisors v. Industrial CommissionCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1976
- Mullins v. Industrial CommissionCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1971
- Scott v. Alabama MacHinery and Supply Co.Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1974
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.