Quinn v. Henry Becker & Son, Inc.
New Jersey Department of Labor Workmen's Compensation Bureau
1Opinion of the Court
*509*******
There appears to be no dispute with respect to the employment of the petitioner by the respondent on the dates of the respective occurrences, nor is there any serious controversy that he met with an accident that arose out of and in the course of his employment with the respondent, Henry Becker & Son, Inc., on December 14th, 1937. The primary question presented for determination is whether the petitioner’s disability, the extent of which does not find any substantia] difference of medical opinion, is due to said accident or whether the incident of July 17th, 1939, if it is to be…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Lazzio v. Primo Silk Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1935
- Batton v. Public Service Corp.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1908
- Selak v. Murray Rubber Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1930
- Atchinson v. Colgate CompanySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1926
- Kelly v. Lembeck & Betz Eagle Brewing Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1914
3Cited by1 opinion
- Moss v. El Dorado Drilling Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1963