Sandel v. Packaging Co. of America
Nebraska Supreme Court
1DissentCaporale, J.
I must respectfully dissent, for I fear the members *165of the majority have this day cast aside their judicial robes and donned the mantle of legislators.
Our Legislature has seen fit to require that an injury, to be compensable under our Workmen’s Compensation Act, result from an “accident.” One of the elements of an accident, as defined in that statute, is “an ... injury happening suddenly and violently . . . .” Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-151(2) (Reissue 1978).
The majority opinion traces the history of certain of our decisions interpreting the sudden and violent requirement. However, the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Brokaw v. RobinsonNebraska Supreme Court · 1969
- Erving v. Tri-Con Industries & Cornhusker Casualty Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1982
- Crosby v. American Stores & Kemper Insurance Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1980
- Crosby v. American StoresNebraska Supreme Court · 1980
- Eliker v. D. H. Merritt & SonsNebraska Supreme Court · 1975
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.