Hendrix v. Ray-Ser Dyeing Company
Tennessee Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Chattin
James R. Hendrix, hereinafter referred to as plaintiff, has appealed to this Court from an adverse judgment of the trial court denying workmen’s compensation benefits.
Ray-Ser Dyeing Company, hereinafter referred to as defendant, was engaged in the business of dyeing and processing man-made fibers, threads and yam.
In carrying out its business, it was necessary to maintain a boiler to generate steam to heat the dye base and to furnish heat for the dryer and the building in which the business was performed.
There was a smoke stack through which smoke from the steam furnace was emitted atop the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Odom v. Sanford & TreadwayTennessee Supreme Court · 1927
- Armstrong v. SpearsTennessee Supreme Court · 1965
- Siskin v. JohnsonTennessee Supreme Court · 1924
- Butler v. JohnsonTennessee Supreme Court · 1968
- Smith v. Lincoln Memorial UniversityTennessee Supreme Court · 1957
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Stratton v. United Inter-Mountain Telephone Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1985
- Murray v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 2001
- Barber v. Ralston PurinaCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1991
- Carpenter v. Hooker Chemical & Plastics Corp.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 1977
- Brown v. Canterbury Corp.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1992
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.