Legal Opinion

London Guarantee & Accident Co. v. McCoy

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided May 27, 1935No. 13,625PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Burke

Plaintiffs in error are hereinafter referred to as the London Company and the Liberty Company respectively; defendants in error as Mrs. McCoy, Arthur, and the commission respectively; and Mrs. McCoy’s deceased husband, Arthur H. McCoy, as McCoy.

This is a workmen’s compensation case. McCoy met his death while in the employ of the Liberty Company, whose insurance was carried by the London Company. Mrs. McCoy, for herself and Arthur, filed with the commission her claim for compensation. The claim was allowed. Plaintiffs in error thereupon took the cause to the district court which affirmed the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Aetna Life Insurance v. Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 1927
  2. Industrial Commission v. Pueblo Auto Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1922
  3. Industrial Commission v. HunterSupreme Court of Colorado · 1923
  4. Rocky Mountain Fuel Co. v. KruzicSupreme Court of Colorado · 1934

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Brookhaven Steam Laundry v. WattsMississippi Supreme Court · 1952
  2. Grayson v. District of Columbia Department of Employment ServicesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1986
  3. Cedar Rapids Community School v. CadySupreme Court of Iowa · 1979
  4. In Re Quest. Sub. by US Ct. of AppealsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1988
  5. Mayo v. Safeway Stores, Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 1969

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API