Legal Opinion
Hessley v. Minneapolis Steel Construction Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided October 5, 1923No. 23,362PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, C. J.
Certiorari in review of proceedings under the Workmen’s .Compensation Act.
The facts are not in dispute. Both parties are within and subject to the compensation act, plaintiff, the .employe, and the Minneapolis Steel Construction Company, the employer. On November 3, 1921, while in the discharge of the duties of his employment, plaintiff received an accidental injury to his left eye which necessitated the removal thereof from its socket, resulting in a complete loss of that member.
*406Plaintiff is 28 years of age. When of the age of 9 years he received an injury to that particular eye which…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Purchase v. Grand Rapids Refrigerator Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1916
- Northwestern Fuel Co. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1915
- Garwin v. District CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
- Zinken v. Melrose Granite Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1919
- Claim of Hobertis v. Columbia Shirt Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1919
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- FLORIDA GAME & FRESH WATER FISH COM'N v. DriggersSupreme Court of Florida · 1953
- Blair v. Armour and CompanyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1957
- Mosgaard v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1924
- Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1925
- Warhelm v. Melrose Granite Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1924
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.