Legal Opinion

RODRIQUEZ v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION Et Al.

Utah Supreme Court

Decided April 9, 1935No. 5465PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FOLLAND, Justice.

The original opinion in this case is published in 86 U. 266; 38 P. (2d) 748. A majority of the court believe the motion for a rehearing should be denied. The decision rests upon and reaffirms the rule first announced in Utah Consol. Min. Co. v. Ind. Comm., 57 Utah 279, 194 P. 657, 16 A. L. R. 458, making applicable to compensation cases the statutory one-year limitation with respect to commencement of actions or special proceedings of a civil nature. Comp. Laws Utah 1917, § 6468, par. 1, now R. S. Utah 1933, 104-2-26, par. 1. This decision has been followed and reaffirmed in…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Utah Consol. Mining Co. v. Industrial Commission of UtahUtah Supreme Court · 1920
  2. Maryland Casualty Co. v. Industrial CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1929
  3. Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Ind. Com.Utah Supreme Court · 1925
  4. Rodriquez v. Industrial CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1934

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. In Re Swan's EstateUtah Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Landauer v. State Industrial Accident CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Lowe v. Industrial CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1935
  4. Hendee v. State Tax CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1938
  5. Utah Copper Co. v. District Court of Third Judicial Dist.Utah Supreme Court · 1937

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

Powered by the Exa API