Legal Opinion

Georgia Insurance Service v. Lord

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided October 26, 1950No. 33240PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGardner, J.

1. There is no merit in the contention of the employer and the insurance carrier that the finding of the board that the injury to the employee arose out of and in the course of his employment was not supported by the evidence. Such a finding, where supported by some evidence, is binding upon the superior court and upon this court and is conclusive. See New Amsterdam &c. Co. v. Sumrell, 30 Ga. App. 682 (118 S. E. 786); Butler v. Mitchell, 49 Ga. App. 315 (175 S. E. 271). The question whether the injury to the employee was caused by an accidental injury arising out of and in the course of the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. SumrellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1923
  2. Standard Accident Insurance v. KikerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1932
  3. Branconnier's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
  4. American Mutual Liability Insurance v. BrockSupreme Court of Georgia · 1928
  5. American Mutual Liability Insurance v. BrockCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1926

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Carroll v. Dan River Mills, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1984
  2. Barry v. Aetna Life & Casualty Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1974
  3. Miller v. Independent Life & Accident InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1952
  4. Barry v. Aetna Life & Casualty Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1974
  5. Barry v. Aetna Life & Casualty Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1974

2 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