Legal Opinion

Ball-Incon Glass Packaging v. Taber

Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma

Decided September 6, 1994No. 83329PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

ADAMS, Judge:

The pivotal issue presented in this review proceeding is the application of the definition of an “occupational disease” under our Workers’ Compensation Act. On the facts revealed by the evidence, the trial court concluded Donna Taber suffered from an occupational disease attributable to her employment by both Kerr Glass and Ball-Incon Glass Packaging. Applying the “last hazardous exposure” rule required by 85 O.S.1991 § 11(4), the trial court placed all the liability for Taber’s benefits on the last employer, Ball-Incon, and its insurance carrier.

Ball-Incon’s quest for…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Parks v. Norman Municipal HospitalSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1984
  2. City of Nichols Hills v. HillSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1975
  3. Peabody Galion Corp. v. WorkmanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1982
  4. Wilson Foods Corp. v. PorterSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1980
  5. Alimenta, U.S.A. v. SawyersCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1982

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Wheaton v. City of Tulsa Fire DepartmentCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1998

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

Powered by the Exa API