Hinchuk v. Swift & Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Upon the relation of Swift & Company, the supreme court granted its writ of certiorari directed to the district court for Ramsey county and the Honorable Hugo O. Hanft, one of the judges thereof, to review the judgment in that court in proceedings brought under the Workmen’s Compensation Act by Mary Hinchuk, widow of Alex Bush,' employe, against relator employer.
1Opinion of the CourtHallam, J.
1. This case arises under the Workmen’s Compensation Act. Alex Bush was in the employ of defendant at its packing plant at South Saint Paul. He and a workman named Harper were engaged in trucking meat to a washing machine. When the truck reached the machine it was unloaded piece by piece. Two men worked together on a truck. One would pull and the other would push and the fair way was to take turns. Bush and Harper quarreled over the moving of the truck, each claimed he was being compelled to do more than his share. The testimony is somewhat in conflict, but one witness testified that they…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Western Indemnity Co. v. PillsburyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
- Matter of Heitz v. . RuppertNew York Court of Appeals · 1916
- Pekin Cooperage Co. v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1918
- State ex rel. Niessen v. District Court of Ramsey CountySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1919
- State ex rel. Anseth v. District CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1916
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Boek v. Wong HingSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1930
- Hanson v. Robitshek-Schneider Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1941
- Southern Cotton Oil Co. v. BruceSupreme Court of Alabama · 1947
- Spring Canyon Coal Co. v. Industrial CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1921
- Garrett v. Gadsden Cooperage Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1923
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.