Ellamar Mining Co. v. Possus
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
GILBERT, Circuit- Judge
(after stating the facts as above).
The defendant contends that, if the plaintiff is entitled to any compensation or damages for his injuries, he must seek the same under the Workmen’s Compensation Act alone, and cites Ross v. Erickson Const. Co., 89 Wash. 634, 155 P. 153, L.R.A.1916F, 319, a case in which it was held that the purpose of the Industrial Insurance Law of Washington (3 Rem. & Bal. Code, §§ 6604 — 1 et seq.) was to remove from the courts personal injury actions by employés, and was intended to cover, not only injuries, but all aggravations through negligence…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Madden's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
- Stertz v. Industrial Insurance CommissionWashington Supreme Court · 1916
- Coronado Beach Co. v. PillsburyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Ross v. Erickson Construction Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1916
- Pacific Coast Casualty Co. v. PillsburyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Bernardo Balancio v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1959
- Noe v. Travelers InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Polucha v. LandesNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1930
- Vesel v. Jardine Mining Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1940
- Brown v. Sinclair Refining Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1922
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.