Legal Opinion

Benjamin F. Shaw Co. v. Musgrave

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided July 2, 1949PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Burnett

This is an action for benefits under the Workmen’s Compensation Law. Code, Section 6851 et seq. The trial judge found in favor of the petitioning workman and fixed his disability as total, allowing him the full recovery under the Act.

The plaintiff in error in his brief and assignments of error states the question before us as follows:

“Petitioner, a steam fitter employed by defendant, was disabled by a heart ailment known as pericarditis with *3effusion. There is no dispute about the employment, nor the wage of the petitioner, and the case hinges on the question of whether or not the disease…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. King v. Buckeye Cotton Oil Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1927
  2. Anderson v. Volz Const. Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1946
  3. Bramble v. ShieldsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1925
  4. Sanders v. Blue Ridge Glass Corp.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1930
  5. Jackson v. HarriesUtah Supreme Court · 1925

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Brown Shoe Company v. ReedTennessee Supreme Court · 1961
  2. McKeever Custom Cabinets v. SmithSupreme Court of Iowa · 1985
  3. Barksdale Lumber Co. v. McAnallySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1977
  4. Boyd v. YoungTennessee Supreme Court · 1951
  5. Central Motor Express, Inc. v. BurneyTennessee Supreme Court · 1964

14 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