Legal Opinion

Hinkle v. State Industrial Accident Commission

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided December 12, 1939PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKelly, J.

In considering the merits of this case, as distinguished from the questions of pleading and procedure involved, two things should be remembered. One is that such a proceeding as this is sui generis. The other is that the commission concedes that, at the time plaintiff’s appeal to the circuit court was taken, plaintiff was entitled to compensation in addition to that awarded in the final order of the commission, which final order was made July 30,1938. We quote from the commission’s opening brief,—

‘ ‘ If plaintiff’s appeal had not been filed so promptly, the commission would, on its own…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Sullivan v. Mountain States Power Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1932
  2. In re RiggsOregon Supreme Court · 1922
  3. Bratt v. State Industrial Accident CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1925
  4. Cranston v. California Ins.Oregon Supreme Court · 1919
  5. Reid v. Multnomah CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1921

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Bowser v. State Industrial Accident CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1947
  2. Dimitroff v. State Industrial Accident CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1957
  3. Stuhr v. State Industrial Accident CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1949
  4. Newell v. TAYLOROregon Supreme Court · 1958
  5. Burkholder v. State Accident Insurance FundCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1972

7 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