Johnson v. Hardy-Burlingham Mining Co.
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion of the Court by
Judge Thomas
Reversing.
This proceeding chiefly involves the procedural provisions of onr Workmen’s Compensation Act, being sections 4880, 4987 inclusive of the 1922 edition of Carroll’s Kentucky Statutes. Such statutes have for their pur*753pose the furnishing of a speedy and scientific adjustment of compensation for industrial injuries arising out of and occurring in the course of the servant’s employment. Besides abolishing the old common law remedies as well as defenses for the recovering of compensation to the injured servant, the statutes provide entirely new machinery…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Phil Hollenbach Co. v. HollenbachCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1918
- Bates & Rogers Construction Co. v. AllenCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1919
- Ashland Iron & Mining Co. v. McDanielCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1924
- Workmen's Compensation Board v. United States Coal & Coke Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1922
- Frye's Guardian v. Gamble Bros.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1920
3Cited by11 opinions
- Kingston-Pocahontas Coal Company v. MaynardCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1925
- Georgia Casualty Co. v. LittleCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1926
- Rautio v. International Harvester Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1930
- Armstrong Tire & Rubber Co. v. FranksMississippi Supreme Court · 1962
- T. M. Crutcher Dental Depot, Inc. v. MillerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1933
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.