Legal Opinion

Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Hoage

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

Decided June 29, 1936No. 6628PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MARTIN, Chief Justice.

This case arises under the provisions of the District of Columbia Workmen’s Compensation Law 1 and involves an award of compensation for temporary total disability and permanent partial disability, sustained by Gus Malouhos, employee, on July 4, 1935. The injury occurred within the District of Columbia and the appellant, the Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company, as insurance carrier, and appellee Gus Malouhos were subject to the provisions of the act. The salient facts in the case, as contained in a stipulation of the respective parties, are as follows: “On the 4th day…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Claim of Katz v. A. Kadans & Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1922
  2. McCulloch v. Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
  3. J. E. Porter Co. v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1921
  4. Hansen v. Northwestern Fuel Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1919
  5. London Guarantee & Accident Co. v. McCoySupreme Court of Colorado · 1935

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. CardilloCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1940
  2. Cedar Rapids Community School v. CadySupreme Court of Iowa · 1979
  3. Perez v. Fred Harvey, Inc.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1950
  4. Tredway v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1979
  5. Louie v. Bamboo GardensIdaho Supreme Court · 1947

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API