Legal Opinion
Hicks v. ARTESIA ALFALFA GROWERS'ASSOCIATION
New Mexico Supreme Court
Decided September 24, 1959No. 6597PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CARMODY, Justice.
Defendants appeal a workmen’s compensation case from the allowance of a 50 per cent penalty for the failure to supply a safety device.
The questions for our determination are (1) whether wires used to hold a cargo rigid for shipping purposes are a safety device for unloading operations and (2) if they are, whether their premature removal at the time of unloading is a failure to supply the same by the employer.
On August 27, 1957, in Artesia, the plaintiff was one of several employees of the defendant association engaged in unloading a prefabricated steel warehouse building from…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- United States v. Stanolind Crude Oil Purchasing Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1940
- Codd v. Westchester Fire InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1942
- Jones v. International Minerals Chemical CorporationNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1949
- Briggs v. Zia CompanyNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1957
- Montoya v. Kennecott Copper CorporationNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1956
3Cited by8 opinions
- Fresquez v. Southwestern Industrial Contractors & Riggers, Inc.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1976
- Benavides v. E. N.M. Med. Ctr.New Mexico Supreme Court · 2014
- Martinez v. Zia Co.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1983
- Benavides v. Eastern New Mexico Medical CenterNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2014
- Jaramillo v. Anaconda Co.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1981
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.