Legal Opinion
Protho v. Nette
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided July 2, 1935No. 26040PublishedCited by 40 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPhelps, J.
This is an original action to review the order and award entered by the Industrial Commission in favor of respondent Fred Nette.
The petitioner’s first proposition is that the employment in which the respondent; was injured does not come under the Workmen’s Compensation Act.
Nette was a marble worker employed by J. T. Protho, doing business as HoldenvVlJe Marble Company. Machinery Is used inside of the marble works shop, at least to the extent of a polisher and a hoist.
Pieces of marble weighing some 450 pounds were loaded on a truck by Nette and a fellow worker, inside the shop, ,by means of a…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Stanolind Pipe Line Co. v. DavisSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
- Nease v. Hughes Stone Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1925
- Christian v. HannaSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1930
- Deep Rock Oil Corp. v. BetchanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1934
- Maryland Casualty Co. v. OsbornSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1933
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Special Indemnity Fund v. FarmerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1945
- Cameron & Henderson, Inc. v. FranksSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1947
- Sinclair Prairie Oil Co. v. StevensSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1944
- Special Indemnity Fund v. DavidsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1945
- Great Northern Life Ins. v. Farmers' Union Co-Operative Gin Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1937
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.