Mabley & Carew Co. v. Lee
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
The issues here presented involve a comparison and construction of the provisions of Article II, Section 35 of the Constitution of Ohio as they now. stand and as they read before the amendment effective January 1, 1924.
In its earlier and briefer form this section consisted of the following language, the italicized part of which was eliminated by the amendment:
“For the purpose of providing compensation to workmen and their dependents, for death, injuries or occupational disease, occasioned in the course of such workmen’s employment, laws may be passed establishing a state fund to…
2Cited by20 opinions
- Van Fossen v. Babcock & Wilcox Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1988
- Vandenbark v. Owens-Illinois Glass Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Brady v. Safety-Kleen Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1991
- Cleveland Bar Ass'n v. CompManagement, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 2004
- Chinn v. China National Aviation Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1955
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.