Legal Opinion
Celestica Inc. v. Hines
Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma
Decided December 18, 2003No. 99,354PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
KENNETH L. BUETTNER, Judge.
¶ 1 Petitioners Celestica Inc. and The Hartford Insurance Company of the Midwest (Celestica) seek review of an order of the Workers’ Compensation Court which found that Respondent Phyllis G. Hines had sustained a work-related cumulative trauma injury and ordered Celestica, as Hines’s last employer for more than 90 days, to pay all of the compensation award. Celestica asserts that the trial court should have apportioned liability for compensation between it and Respondent Lucent Technologies (Lucent). Because we find the trial court correctly applied the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Parks v. Norman Municipal HospitalSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1984
- Parks v. Flint Steel Corp.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1988
- BE & K. CONST. v. AbbottSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2002
- Rankin v. Ford Motor Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1996
- Lummus Construction v. VancourtCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1992
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- CNA Insurance Co. v. EllisSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2006
- OCT Equipment, Inc. v. FerrellCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2005
- Keco, Inc. v. HaywardCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2005
- Anderson Mechanical, Inc. v. SpiegelCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2005
- Energy Exchanger Co. v. HillCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2006
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.