Legal Opinion

Maryland Casualty Co. v. Kent

Texas Commission of Appeals

Decided March 7, 1928No. 1051-4414PublishedCited by 44 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNickels, J.

The nature of the case is fully exhibited in the opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals. 271 S. W. 929. An important question here is the existence vel non of a relation between Kent (the insured) and Gulf Refining Company (subscriber per the Workmen’s Compensation Law), which amounted to that of employer and employs (article 5246 — 82, Vernon’s Sayles’ Tex. Civ. Statutes 1918 as amended; article 8309, R. S. 1925), wherein it is said that an “employs” is a “person in the service of another under any contract of hire, expressed or implied,” etc.

The relation is evidenced by the writing executed…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Lumberman's Reciprocal Ass'n. v. BehnkenTexas Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Singer Manufacturing Co. v. RahnSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
  3. Shannon v. Western Indemnity Co.Texas Commission of Appeals · 1924
  4. Cunningham v. International RailroadTexas Supreme Court · 1879
  5. Railroad Company v. HanningSupreme Court of the United States · 1873

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

3Cited by44 opinions

  1. American General Insurance Co. v. ColemanTexas Supreme Court · 1957
  2. Schroeder v. RainboldtTexas Supreme Court · 1936
  3. Texas Employers' Insurance v. IngeTexas Supreme Court · 1948
  4. Southern Underwriters v. SamanieTexas Supreme Court · 1941
  5. Texas Employers' Ins. Ass'n v. HerronCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1930

39 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