Corken v. Corken Steel Products, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976)
1DissentMontgomery, Judge
I respectfully dissent because I feel that the doctrine of Lexington Railway System v. True, 276 Ky. 446, 124 S.W.2d 467, is sound and for the further reason that it is unwise to change it. It has been followed for many years in many cases; thus, the rule is well established. The majority opinion recognizes this in pointing out that many cases would have to be overruled.
The basis of the rule is set forth in Maddox v. Heaven Hill Distilleries, Inc., Ky., 329 S.W.2d 189, as follows:
“When we test the facts of the instant case by our definition of ‘arising out of’ we find that this injury did not…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- January-Wood Company v. SchumacherCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1929
- Palmer v. MainCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1925
- Harlan Collieries Co. v. ShellCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1951
- Stasel v. American Radiator & Standard Sanitary Corp.Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1955
- Lexington Ry. System v. TrueCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1939
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.