Legal Opinion

Gadberry v. Hutchinson Egg Case Filler Co.

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided January 11, 1919No. 21,810PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Appeal from Reno district court; Frank F. Prigg, judge.

1Opinion of the Court

*73The opinion of the court was delivered by

Porter, J.:

In an action under the workmen’s compensation law, plaintiff recovered judgment, and defendant appeals.

Plaintiff was in the employ of the Hutchinson Egg Case Filler Company; that company and the Hutchinson Box Board and Paper Company occupied adjoining tracts of land, upon which their factories were located, a space of about, sixty feet separating their main buildings. At each factory there was a platform dock, and these were connected by a runway -over which strawboard and other material used in the egg case fil,ler factory were conveyed…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Bevard v. Skidmore-Patterson Coal Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1917
  2. O'Neal v. BainbridgeSupreme Court of Kansas · 1915
  3. Hicks ex rel. Hicks v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1917
  4. Cain v. National Zinc Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1915
  5. Bundy v. Petroleum Products Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1918

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Williams v. HannaSupreme Court of Kansas · 1919
  2. Iott v. MosbySupreme Court of Kansas · 1928
  3. Mathis v. Ash Grove Lime & Portland Cement Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1928
  4. Wise v. Central Dairy Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1926
  5. Alvarado v. Flower Bros. Rock Crusher Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1921

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API