Trumbull Cliffs Furnace Co. v. Shackovsky
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtVickery, P. J.
We gather, from the record, that the Trumbull Cliffs Furnace Company, plaintiff in error, was a corporation, and employed more than five workmen, and had complied with the requirements of the Workmen’s Compensation Law of Ohio, by either paying into the fund, or carrying its own insurance, as permitted by the law. We believe that it had paid into the insurance fund, as provided for by law in Ohio.
We learn that the Truscon Steel Company was likewise a corporation which employed more than five workmen, and it too had, complied with the Workmen’s Compensation Law by paying into the fund.
It seems…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Parkhill Truck Co. v. WilsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1942
- Truscon Steel Co. v. Trumbull Cliffs Furnace Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1929
- Colvin v. Kokusai Kisen Kabushiki KaishaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1934
- State Ex Rel. Woods v. Hughes Oil Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1929
- Ierardi v. Farmers Trust Co. of NewarkSuperior Court of Delaware · 1928
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.