Legal Opinion

Neal v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided April 4, 1978No. 50292PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BARNES, Justice:

Petitioner, hereinafter Claimant, seeks review and vacation of an order denying claim for compensation for accidental injuries received during course of employment. Claimant worked in a retail automotive center operated by Respondent, an Own Risk employer. Injury occurred as result of battery acid splashing unto Claimant’s hands and face while working with automobile batteries in June, 1975. Respondent operated as an Own Risk employer, listing 4,376 employees of “Catalogue Order & Retail Department Stores” in Oklahoma, 85 O.S. 1971, § 61(d).

In defense of this claim, Respondent…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Southland Refining Co. v. State Industrial Com.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1933
  2. Gooldy v. LawsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1932
  3. Miller v. Sears, Roebuck & CompanySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1976
  4. Bishop v. WilsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1931
  5. Skelly Oil Company v. WatersSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1959

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Sears, Roebuck and Co. v. TatumSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1978
  2. Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. ArmstrongSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1978

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

Powered by the Exa API