Legal Opinion

Banister v. State Industrial Accident Commission

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided January 26, 1933PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRand, C. J.

In March, 1931, plaintiff, while employed in cutting brush for the city of Portland, inadvertently came into contact with poison-oak in ignorance of what it was and thereby sustained an injury which resulted in his total disability for a period of about nineteen days. He applied to tbe State Industrial Accident Commission for compensation but Ms claim was rejected upon the single ground that “the condition suffered was not due to an accidental injury arising out of and in the course of his employment”. He appealed therefrom to the circuit court for Multnomah county, where a trial was had by…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Vennen v. New Dells Lumber Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1915
  2. Matter of Lerner v. Rump Bros.New York Court of Appeals · 1925
  3. Ætna Life Ins. v. Portland Gas & Coke Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1916
  4. Iwanicki v. State Industrial Accident CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1922
  5. Taylor v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1923

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Chalfant v. ArensOregon Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Ryan v. State Industrial Accident CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1936
  3. Zurich Insurance Company, a Corporation, and Mack Trucks, Inc., a Corporation v. Robert SigourneyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1960

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

Powered by the Exa API