Suggs v. Ternstedt Manufacturing Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtFellows, J.
Plaintiff received an injury by a particle of steel becoming imbedded in his right eye. That the accident arose out of and in the course of his employment is conceded. As a result of the injury a traumatic cataract formed which was removed by an operation, the expense of which was borne by defendant. Since the operation plaintiff has one-sixtieth normal vision without the use of a glass, but with a strong glass his vision with that eye is above normal, but his two eyes do not co-ordinate. If he uses the uninjured eye, he can not wear the strong glass on the other; if he uses the injured eye…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Stefan v. Red Star Mill & Elevator Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1920
- Claim of Frings v. Pierce Arrow Motor Car Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1918
- Juergens Bros. v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1919
- O'Brien's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1917
- Purcell v. International Motor Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1918
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Miller v. Sullivan Milk Products, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1971
- Rench v. Kalamazoo Stove & Furnace Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1938
- Mitchell v. Metal Assemblies, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1967
- Lindhout v. Brochu & HassMichigan Supreme Court · 1931
- Powers v. Motor Wheel Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1931
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.