Legal Opinion

Claim for Compensation of Ikoma v. Oahu Sugar Co.

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided May 22, 1916No. 924PublishedCited by 22 opinions

Reserved Question from Industrial Accident Board, City and County of Houolulu.

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT BY

QUARLES, J.

(Robertson, C.J., dissenting.)

The claimant presented his notice of injury and claim for compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act *292to the industrial accident board of the city and county of Honolulu against the Oahu Sugar Company, Limited, and Kenichi Harumi stating the nature and cause of injury as follows: “Total loss of the sight of the right eye, caused by a chip of iron from a drill entering the eye, while he was engaged in drilling for blasting purpose, the said Ichijiro Ikoma being at the time of the accident in the employment of Kenichi Harumi,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Young v. DuncanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
  2. State ex rel. Duluth Brewing & Malting Co. v. District CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
  3. King's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1915

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Amantiad v. OdumHawaii Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Korsak v. Hawaii Permanente Medical Group, Inc.Hawaii Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Puchert v. AgsaludHawaii Supreme Court · 1984
  4. Treloar v. Swinerton and Walberg Co.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Evanson v. University of HawaiiHawaii Supreme Court · 1971

17 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