Legal Opinion

Hemmingson v. Libby, McNeil & Libby

District Court, D. Alaska

Decided March 29, 1950No. 6197-APublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FOLTA, District Judge.

The above entitled action to correct the award of the Industrial Board was attacked on the ground, among others, that it was not instituted in the Third Judicial Division where the injury occurred as required by Section 43-3-22, A.C.L.A.1949, which so far as material, provides: “An award by the full Board shall be conclusive and binding as to all questions of fact; but either party to the dispute, within thirty days from the date of such award, if award is not in accordance with law, may bring injunction proceedings, mandatory or otherwise, against the Industrial Board,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Matheson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1913

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Hukill v. Pacific and Arctic Railway & Navigation Co.District Court, D. Alaska · 1958
  2. Scott v. Alaska Industrial BoardDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 1954
  3. Opinion No., Texas Attorney General Reports2001
  4. Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion, Texas Attorney General Reports2001

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API