Legal Opinion

Trumbull Cliffs Furnace Co. v. Shachovsky

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 23, 1924No. 18219PublishedCited by 42 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAllen, J.

The jury found for the plaintiff upon the allegations of the first defense. Since the defendant’s second and third defenses set up compliance upon the part of the owner of the premises and the subcontractor with the Workmen’s Compensation Act, (Gen. Code, Sections 1465-37 to 1465-108), and acceptance of compensation by the plaintiff as a complete defense to the action, raising no question of payment pro tanto, one legal problem only arises herein. This is a question of the interpretation of Section 1465-61 (3), General Code, which reads as follows:

“Every person in the service of any…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Merrill v. Marietta Torpedo Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1917
  2. Newark Paving Co. v. KlotzSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1914
  3. Mercer v. OttWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1916

3Cited by42 opinions

  1. Jones v. VIP Development Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Pryor v. WebberOhio Supreme Court · 1970
  3. New York Central Railroad v. MilhiserIndiana Supreme Court · 1952
  4. Guy v. Arthur H. Thomas Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1978
  5. Daniels v. MacGregor Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1965

37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API