Legal Opinion

Rodriquez v. Industrial Commission

Utah Supreme Court

Decided December 12, 1934No. 5465PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STEAUP, Chief Justice.

This is a review of proceedings of the Industrial Commission whereby the applicant, Eodriquez, an employee of the United States Smelting, Eefining & Mining Company, was denied compensation under our Workmen’s Compensa tion Act. But one question is presented, that of the statute of limitations. The commission held the cause barred because the application was not filed in time, and on that ground, and that ground alone, dismissed the application. The applicant complains of the ruling.

Our statute, R. S. Utah 1933, 42-1-92, provides that,

“If no notice of the accident and…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Utah Consol. Mining Co. v. Industrial Commission of UtahUtah Supreme Court · 1920
  2. Maryland Casualty Co. v. Industrial CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1929
  3. Katsanos v. Industrial CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1928

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Salt Lake City v. Industrial CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1937
  2. RODRIQUEZ v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION Et Al.Utah Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Utah Copper Co. v. District Court of Third Judicial Dist.Utah Supreme Court · 1937

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

Powered by the Exa API