Truck Insurance Exchange v. Seelbach
Texas Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Culver
In this suit brought by respondent, Charles Seelbach, under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, insurer raises the question as to whether or not medical testimony asserting the beneficial effects of surgery is admissible in the trial court on appeal where the insurer did not admit liability, where no operation was tendered or requested in the proceedings before the Industrial Accident Board, and where no surgery was indicated prior to the rendition of the final award by the Board.
The trial court’s ruling in excluding that testimony was approved on appeal. 328 S.W. 2d 346. We have concluded that…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Mingus, Receiver v. WadleyTexas Supreme Court · 1926
- Middleton v. Texas Power & Light Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1916
- National Mutual Casualty Co. v. LoweryTexas Supreme Court · 1941
- National Surety Corporation v. Mrs. Ollie Bellah, and Husband, W. F. BellahCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1957
- Winford Leo Evans v. Stearns-Roger Manufacturing Co., Employer and Standard Accident Insurance Co., InsurerCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1958
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by59 opinions
- Harvey Thomas Smoot, Jr. v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1962
- Ford Motor Company v. Marvin R. MathisCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1963
- Aetna Casualty & Surety Company v. DepoisterCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1965
- St. Paul Insurance Co. v. McPeakCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1982
- Smith v. StephensonTexas Supreme Court · 1982
54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.