Legal Opinion
Wilson v. Rowan Drilling Co.
New Mexico Supreme Court
Decided September 16, 1950No. 5244PublishedCited by 50 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BRICE, Chief Justice.
The above actions, for compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1941 Comp. § 57-901 et seq., were brought separately by the widow and minor son respectively, of an employee of the defendant Rowan Drilling Company and its surety the United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company. They were consolidated and tried as one action with one judgment, from which this appeal has been prosecuted.
In this opinion reference will be made to the parties as follows: Claimant Mrs. Farley Wilson as “Mrs. Wilson”; claimant Billy Roy Wilson as “Billy Wilson”; the defendant Rowan…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Sweat v. AllenSupreme Court of Florida · 1941
- Stevenson v. Lee Moor Contracting Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1941
- Clawson v. . Pierce-Arrow Motor Car Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1921
- R. J. Allison, Inc. v. BolingSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1943
- Commercial Casualty Ins. Co. v. StrawnCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1931
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by50 opinions
- Morningstar Water Users Ass'n v. New Mexico Public Utility CommissionNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1995
- Edens v. New Mexico Health & Social Services DepartmentNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1976
- Brown v. Arapahoe Drilling CompanyNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1962
- Whitehurst v. Rainbo Baking CompanyNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1962
- Mascarenas v. KennedyNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1964
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.