Honaker & Feeney v. Hartley
Supreme Court of Virginia
1Opinion of the Court
Sims, P.,
after making the foregoing statement, delivered the following opinion of the court:
There are only two questions presented for decision by the assignments of error, which will be disposed of in their order as stated below:
1. Did the injury in the instant case arise out of and in the course of the employment of the injured employee, within the meaning of the workmen’s compensation law?
The question must be answered in the affirmative.
Section 2, subsection D, of the workmen’s compensation law, thus defines the injury for which compensation is provided by such law:
“Injury and personal…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Cudahy Packing Co. Of Nebraska v. ParramoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- De Constantin v. Public Service CommissionWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1914
- Granite Sand & Gravel Co. v. WilloughbyIndiana Court of Appeals · 1919
- Taylor v. Binswanger & Co.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1921
- Malone v. Detroit United RailwayMichigan Supreme Court · 1918
3Cited by20 opinions
- Baggett Transportation Co. of Birmingham v. DillonSupreme Court of Virginia · 1978
- R & T INVESTMENTS, LTD. v. JohnsSupreme Court of Virginia · 1984
- Lucas v. LucasSupreme Court of Virginia · 1972
- George Roberson, etc, etal v. Bonnie Whetsel, etcCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1995
- Michael BERNARD v. CARLSON COMPANIES-TGIF and Indemnity Insurance Company of North AmericaCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 2012
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.