Legal Opinion

Industrial Commission v. Murphy

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided February 14, 1938No. 14,280PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Burke

This is a workmen’s compensation case-. The parties are hereinafter referred to in order as the commission, the fund, the company, and Murphy. The sole question presented is, Did the injury complained of arise out of and in the course of the employment?

The company mines gold about two miles from Empire, which is a short distance above Idaho Springs. It has nothing to sell, no stock to dispose of, nothing to advertise. O’Dell was a stockholder and its secretary and manager, and Gammon, not a stockholder, was assistant treasurer. Murphy, 27 years old, was employed as a sampler and assistant…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Aetna Life Insurance v. Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 1927
  2. Hama Hama Logging Co. v. Department of Labor & IndustriesWashington Supreme Court · 1930
  3. Conklin v. Kansas City Public Service Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1931
  4. Industrial Commission v. AndersonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1917
  5. F. Becker Asphaltum Roofing Co. v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1928

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Ricciardi v. Damar Products Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1965
  2. Tom Joyce 7 Up Company v. LaymanIndiana Court of Appeals · 1942
  3. University of Denver v. NemethSupreme Court of Colorado · 1953
  4. Dorsch v. Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 1974
  5. Linderman v. Cownie FursSupreme Court of Iowa · 1944

19 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