Legal Opinion

Jones v. Casualty Reciprocal Exch.

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided April 6, 1923No. 2719. [fn*]PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLevy, J.

(after stating the facts as above). To come within the term “injury received in the course of employment,” as defined by the Workmen’s Compensation Law, it must appear that the “injury” (1) was one “having to do with and originating in the work” of the employer, and further (2) that it was “received” by the employee “while engaged in or about the furtherance of the affairs or business of his employer whether upon the employer’s premises or elsewhere.” Article 5246 — 82, pt. 4, Rev. Stat. of 1920. 'Stated in another way, the law means to allow compensation to an employee who suffers an injury…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Donovan's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
  2. American Indemnity Co. v. DinkinsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1919
  3. Russell v. . the Hudson River Railroad CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
  4. Kirby Lumber Co. v. ScurlockTexas Supreme Court · 1922
  5. Vick v. . N.Y.C. H.R.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1884

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

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. American General Insurance Co. v. ColemanTexas Supreme Court · 1957
  2. Sylcox v. National Lead Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1931
  3. Employers' Liability Assur. Corp. v. LightCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1925
  4. Trachtenberg v. CastilloCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1923
  5. Fritzmeier v. Texas Employers' InsuranceTexas Supreme Court · 1938

29 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