Legal Opinion
Tomhave v. Galena
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided May 2, 1930No. 27,884PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Olsen, C.
Proceeding by the parents of Herbert Tomhave to recover compensation under the workmen’s compensation law for the death of the son, caused by an industrial accident. The industrial commission awarded compensation.
The single question presented is whether the parents were partial dependents receiving regularly part of their support from the son at the time of his death. The governing law is found in G. S. 1923, § 4275, subds. 3, 4, 17, 19 and 20. Parents who regularly derive part of their support from the wages of a deceased workman at the time of his death and for a reasonable time…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Maher v. Duluth Yellow Cab Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
- Lading v. City of DuluthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
- State ex rel. Ernest Fleckenstein Brewing Co. v. District CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1916
- Austin v. Leonard, Crossett & Riley, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1929
- Klein v. McClearySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1923
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Burke v. B. F. Nelson Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1945
- Galt v. Travelers' Ins. Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1932
- Langland v. State Department of HighwaysSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1957
- Larson v. A. Guthrie Co. Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
- Richard v. Federal Cartridge Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1944