Legal Opinion

Mead Paper Co. v. Brizendine

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama

Decided December 4, 1990No. Civ. 7630PublishedCited by 36 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

This is a workmen's compensation case.

Anthony Brizendine (employee) brought this action to recover benefits from Mead Paper Company (employer) for a back injury that resulted from an on-the-job fall.

After an ore tenus proceeding, the trial court found that the employee was permanently, totally disabled based on his inability to obtain gainful employment. The employer appeals.

In the past, our review in workmen's compensation cases has been limited to finding whether any legal evidence exists to support the trial court's finding of fact. Cook Transports,Inc. v. Beavers, 528 So.2d 875…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Bell v. DriskillSupreme Court of Alabama · 1968
  2. Genpak Corp. v. GibsonCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1988
  3. Alabama Textile Products Corporation v. GranthamSupreme Court of Alabama · 1955
  4. Brunson Milling Co. v. GrimesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1958
  5. Fordham v. Southern Phenix Textiles, Inc.Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1980

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

3Cited by36 opinions

  1. Ex Parte Alabama Ins. Guar. Ass'nSupreme Court of Alabama · 1995
  2. Jim Walter Resources, Inc. v. BudnickCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1993
  3. Dolgencorp., Inc. v. HudsonCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 2005
  4. Bidermann Industries Corp. v. PetersonCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1994
  5. Mayfield Trucking Co. v. NapierCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1998

31 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