Legal Opinion

Hoover v. Williamson

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided October 13, 1964No. [No. 8, September Term, 1964.]PublishedCited by 50 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHammond, J.

Each year X-ray examinations of the chests of certain employees of General Electric Company are required by the company under the direction and supervision of Dr. C. Vernon Williamson, a physician who is paid for his services by the company. One of those who was so examined was the appellant, Willard Hoover, who had worked for the company for many years in a job which subjected him to exposure to silica dust.

Alleging that he has silicosis in serious and permanent form, which causes him pain and disability and results in medical expenses and loss of time from work, Hoover sued General Electric…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Pashley v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1944
  2. Lotspeich v. Chance Vought AircraftCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1963
  3. Chandlee v. ShockleyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1959
  4. Dubois v. . DeckerNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
  5. Brack v. EvansCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1963

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

3Cited by50 opinions

  1. Harris v. KreutzerSupreme Court of Virginia · 2006
  2. Waldman v. RohrbaughCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1966
  3. Dehn v. EdgecombeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2005
  4. Greenberg v. PerkinsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1993
  5. Keene v. WigginsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977

45 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