Hillestad v. Industrial Insurance Commission
Washington Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for What-com county, Hardin, J., entered September 22, 1913, upon the verdict of a jury rendered in favor of the plaintiffs, in an action for the death of a son, on appeal from a ruling of the industrial insurance commission.
1Opinion of the CourtChadwick, J.
Respondents owned and operated a shingle mill in Whatcom county, to which they brought shingle bolts by floating them down a creek on which the mill was situated. The deceased minor son of respondents lost his life about eighty rods from the mill while engaged as a workman in their business. The situation and condition attending the employment and the accident are fairly shown by the testimony of Isaac A. Hillestad:
“Q. Did you have any conversation with Arthur? A. We had several conversations. He wanted to go up there to go to work, and I would not take him out of school. He wanted to go up…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Bloom v. Franklin Life InsuranceIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
- Wendt v. Industrial Insurance CommissionWashington Supreme Court · 1914
- Casey v. Barber Asphalt Paving Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1913
- Conboy v. Railway Officials & Employes' Accident Ass'nIndiana Court of Appeals · 1897
- Murphy v. BennettAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Pruitt v. HarkerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1931
- American Products Co. v. VillwockWashington Supreme Court · 1941
- Hogan v. State Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1922
- Clausen v. Department of Labor & IndustriesWashington Supreme Court · 1942
- Hamilton v. RandallSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1928
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.