Legal Opinion · Dissent

Slater v. Ismert-Hincke Milling Co.

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided May 8, 1920No. 22,634Published

Appeal from Shawnee district court, division No. 2; George H. Whitcomb, judge.

1DissentDawson, J.

(dissenting) : Monetary compensation for the injury or death of a workman is a cold-blooded proposition, *775but it is the only practical reparation that can be given in this imperfect world (Truman v. Railroad Co., 98 Kan. 761, 766, 161 Pac. 587), and this heartless reparatory yardstick is to be used as an unsentimental matter of mathematical calculation. Whatever part of the boy’s wages was devoted to feed, clothe and shelter himself was obviously not used to support his parents. It is that portion of his wages which was devoted to his parents’ support, not to his own support as well as theirs,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Truman v. Kansas City, Mexico & Orient RailroadSupreme Court of Kansas · 1916
  2. McGarvie v. Frontenac Coal Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1918

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

Powered by the Exa API