Legal Opinion

Gehrke v. Weiss

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided February 10, 1939No. 31,857PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Holt, Justice.

This action was brought by the special administrator of the estate of Carl Gehrke, deceased, to recover damages on the ground that the -wrongful and negligent acts of defendants caused the death. The defense was that defendants as well as Carl Gehrke were under the workmen’s compensation act; that the accident which resulted in his death arose out of and in the course of the employment and the remedy for the death must be sought under the act. When the evidence was all in, the court, Judge Tifft, on motion of defendants, directed a verdict in favor of defendants on the ground…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Donovan's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
  2. Claim of Littler v. George A. Fuller Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1918
  3. Claim of Kowalek v. New York Consolidated RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
  4. Nesbitt v. Twin City Forge & Foundry Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
  5. Konopka v. Jackson County Road CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1935

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Radermacher v. St. Paul City Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1943
  2. Cavilla v. Northern States Power Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1942
  3. Hardware Mutual Casualty Co. v. OzmunSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1944
  4. Sandy v. Walter Butler Shipbuilders, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1946
  5. Bonfig v. Megarry Brothers, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1972

1 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