Legal Opinion
Channing v. Payton
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided October 13, 1931No. 22591PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRiley, J.
This is an original proceeding in this court to review an order and award of the State Industrial Commission.
On September 5, 1930, • the respondent, Amos Payton, while in the employ of petitioner Channing, agent of Adams Mine, received an accidental injury in the course and growing out of said employment and covered by the Workmen’s Compensation Law. The nature of the injury' was “sprained back and injured side.”
Report of the injury was filed with the State Industrial Commission on September 11, 1930. Weekly wages were $21, and weekly rate of compensation $13.40. Payments were commenced on…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- St. Louis Mining & Smelting Co. v. State Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1925
- Employers' Liability Assurance Corp. v. CoffmanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1931
- Federal Mining & Smelting Co. v. MontgomerySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1931
- Bride v. BrideSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1928
3Cited by13 opinions
- Williams Bros. v. State Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1932
- Skelly Oil Co. v. RoseSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1936
- Wm. A. Smith Const. Co. v. PriceSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1936
- Carlson v. F. H. DeAtley & Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1935
- Marland v. ForresterSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1933
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.