Legal Opinion

Smith v. Camel Mfg. Co.

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided July 27, 1951PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Burnett

This is a Workmen’s Compensation case. The trial judge, after hearing the facts and giving the matter much deliberation, dismissed the suit. The original plaintiff has seasonably perfected her appeal.

The accident for which compensation is sought happened on January 14, 1948. For many months prior to this time the petitioner had worked for the defendant Camel Manufacturing Company in operating an indus trial sewing machine. This Company was qualified to operate under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, Code, Sec. 6851 et seq., and the insurance carrier was made a defendant. On the morning of…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Cudahy Packing Co. Of Nebraska v. ParramoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
  2. Bountiful Brick Co. v. GilesSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
  3. Barnett v. Britling Cafeteria Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1932
  4. Little v. Johnson City Foundry & MacHine Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1928
  5. Bales, Admx. v. Service Club No. 1, Camp ChaffeeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1945

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Lollar v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1989
  2. Bennett v. Vanderbilt UniversityTennessee Supreme Court · 1955
  3. McKinney v. Hardwick Clothes, Inc.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1966
  4. Mallette v. Mercury Outboard Supply CompanyTennessee Supreme Court · 1959
  5. Aluminum Co. of America v. BakerTennessee Supreme Court · 1976

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