Prouse v. Industrial Commission
Supreme Court of Colorado
Proceeding under the workmen’s compensation act. Claim denied. Error to the District Court of Boulder County, Hon. Neil F. Graham, Judge.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Denison
The Industrial Commission denied the claim of the plaintiff in error, Pearl Prouse, for compensation for the death of her husband, and its judgment was affirmed by the district court.
It is claimed, first, that the commission did not make sufficient findings of fact as required by law, and second, that the commission erroneously held that the death of the husband of plaintiff in error, George Prouse, was not caused by accident.
As to the first point, the finding of the commission was “that the burden of proof is upon the claimants herein. That the claimants have not established their claim by a…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Western Indemnity Co. v. PillsburyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
- Matthiessen & Hegeler Zinc Co. v. Industrial BoardIllinois Supreme Court · 1918
- Hurle's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
- United Paperboard Co. v. LewisIndiana Court of Appeals · 1917
- Claim of Gardner v. Horseheads Construction Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1916
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- Southeastern Express Co. v. EdmondsonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1923
- Tintic Milling Co. v. Industrial CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1922
- Womack v. Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 1969
- Industrial Commission v. MilkaSupreme Court of Colorado · 1966
- Employers Liability Assurance Corp. v. MontgomeryCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1932
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.