Legal Opinion
Ward & Gow v. Krinsky
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided June 5, 1922No. 343PublishedCited by 58 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Pitney
The New York Workmen’s Compensation Law of 1913-1914 [Laws 1913, c. 816; Laws 1914, cc. 41 and 316] sustained as constitutional against attacks based on the due process and equal protection clauses of- the Fourteenth Amendment in New York Central R. R. Co. v. White, 243 U. S. 188, after several amendments was further amended by c. 634 of the Laws of 1918, which added to the list of hazardous émployments in § 2 a new sub-division or group, as group 45 — the second to be so designated — reading as follows: “ Group 45. All other employments not hereinbefore enumerated carried on by any person,…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- New York Central Railroad Company v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Mountain Timber Company v. State of WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Middleton v. Texas Power & Light Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Jeffrey Manufacturing Co. v. BlaggSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Arizona Employers' Liability CasesSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by58 opinions
- Crowell v. BensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Cudahy Packing Co. Of Nebraska v. ParramoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Red Cross Line v. Atlantic Fruit Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Fiske v. KansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Montana National Bank v. Yellowstone County of MontanaSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.