Legal Opinion
New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. Rutherford
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided February 8, 1930No. 12263PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtConner, C. J.
This,suit was instituted by Driver Rutherford and wife against the appellant New Amsterdam Casualty Company in the Sixty-Seventh district court of Tarrant county, seeking to set aside a ruling of the Industrial Accident Board, and to recover compensation for alleged injuries to Driver Rutherford, while in tlie employ of the firm known as Quisle & Andrews Construction Company.
After sufficiently alleging the jurisdictional facts, the plaintiff Driver Rutherford further alleged that on the Xlth day of March, 1027, he was an employee of the Quisle & Andrews Construction Company, a subscriber…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway Co. v. WashingtonTexas Supreme Court · 1901
- Rosenthal Dry Goods Co. v. HillebrandtTexas Commission of Appeals · 1928
- Texas Employers' Ins. v. FitzgeraldTexas Commission of Appeals · 1927
- Texas Employers' Ins. Ass'n v. StephensCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1929
- Southern Surety Co. v. MartinCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1929
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Armour & Co. v. TomlinCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1931
- Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. LeighCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1933
- Hatt v. WalkerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1930
- Traders' & General Ins. Co. v. LowCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1934
- Federal Underwriters Exchange v. PriceCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1940
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.