Legal Opinion
Protein Technologies International/Ralston Purina v. Hammock
Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma
Decided July 27, 1994No. 81677PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
JONES, Presiding Judge:
Petitioner, Protein Technologies International/Ralston Purina, brings this review proceeding claiming the Three Judge Panel erred in finding notice of the injury was given within sixty days of the injury as required by 85 O.S.1991 § 24.2, and further erred ■ in finding that Bill Hammock’s detached retina resulted from an on-the-job injury. Additionally, it is alleged that this award is erroneous by virtue of the fact that Claimant was 100% permanent partially disabled to the right eye prior to the date of this accident, and, in any event, if an award…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Bartlett v. American National Bank & Trust Co. of SapulpaSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1984
- Thomas v. Keith Hensel Optical LabsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1982
- Lacy v. Schlumberger Well ServiceSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1992
- Pearl v. Associated Milk Producers, Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1978
- Atlantic Richfield Co. v. State Ex Rel. Wildlife Conservation CommissionSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1983
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Frew v. McDonnell Douglas, Industrial Indemnity Co.Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1996
- Tyson Foods, Inc. v. MarezCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1996
- Johnson v. Special Indemnity FundCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1999
- Kelley v. Waste Management Co.Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1995
- Bowers v. Glen Eagle ApartmentsCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2006
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.