Farmer v. Bieber-Goodman Corporation
Supreme Court of Connecticut
1Opinion of the CourtMaltbie, C. J.
These two cases present the same question of law. The plaintiffs in both claim compensation for incapacity resulting from mercurial poison ing, an occupational disease, arising out of and in the course of their employment in the hat industry. In each the commissioner denied compensation because of a failure of the plaintiff to meet the requirements of the statute as to written notice of the claim for compensation. In the Farmer case the first manifestation of a symptom of the disease occurred in the fall of 1931, the plaintiff became incapacitated March 2d, 1933, but he made no written claim…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Esposito v. Marlin-Rockwell CorporationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1921
- Preveslin v. Derby & Ansonia Developing Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1930
- Panico v. Sperry Engineering Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1931
- Hines v. Norwalk Lock Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1924
- Walsh v. A. Waldron & SonsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1931
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Crowley's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1934
- Gil v. Courthouse OneSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
- Moody v. State Highway DepartmentIdaho Supreme Court · 1935
- Iacomacci v. Town of TrumbullSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
- Kropp v. ParkerDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1934
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.