Legal Opinion
Anderson v. Brinkhoff
Supreme Court of Colorado
Decided September 27, 1993No. 92SC271PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Chief Justice ROYIRA delivered the Opinion of the Court.
We granted certiorari to resolve an apparent conflict between the court of appeals decision below in Anderson v. Brinkhoff, 839 P.2d 487 (Colo.App.1992), and Masdin v. Gardner-Denver-Cooper Industries, Inc., 689 P.2d 714 (Colo.App.1984). We believe that Masdin correctly interprets the Workers’ Compensation Act, and accordingly reverse the court of appeals and remand with directions.
I
Petitioner, Donald Anderson, has alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency, a hereditary condition which causes progressive emphysema and associated heart problems.…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- McNicol's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1913
- Booker v. Duke Medical CenterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
- Rutledge v. Tultex Corp./Kings YarnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- Morrison v. Burlington IndustriesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
- Vause v. Vause Farm Equipment Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Deschenes v. Transco, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2008
- Delta Drywall v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office of the StateColorado Court of Appeals · 1993
- City of Littleton v. Industrial Claim Appeals OfficeSupreme Court of Colorado · 2016
- City of Littleton v. Industrial Claim Appeals OfficeSupreme Court of Colorado · 2016
- Colorado Mental Health Institute v. AustillColorado Court of Appeals · 1997
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.