Legal Opinion

Covington v. Rutledge Drilling Company

New Mexico Supreme Court

Decided November 13, 1962No. 6925PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CARMODY, Justice.

Covington, as claimant, appeals from the ■denial of any award for workmen’s compensation.

The findings of fact by the trial court are in no sense attacked, except No. 8, which will be set out in full hereafter. Otherwise, the facts as found by the trial court may be summarized as follows:

Covington was a roughneck, employed by the defendant drilling company at various locations. He had been working on a drill ■site approximately seventy miles from Farmington on the day of the accident in ■question. The shortest route from Farmington (where the men lived) to the drill ■site…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Wilson v. Rowan Drilling Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1950
  2. McKinney v. DorlacNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Totah Drilling Company v. AbrahamNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1958
  4. Clodfelter v. ReynoldsNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1961
  5. Feldhut v. LathamNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1955

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Petty v. WilliamsNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1963
  2. Cooper v. Bank of New MexicoNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1966
  3. Michael v. WestNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1966
  4. Dunson Contractors, Inc. v. KouryNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1966
  5. Cooper v. Bank of New MexicoNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1966

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API