Legal Opinion
McLaughlin v. Thompson, Boland & Lee Inc.
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided June 14, 1945No. 30876PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtParker, J.
1. Where an employee has accepted the workmen’s compensation act as is therein provided, his rights against the employer to recover on account of injuries sustained by reason of the breach of any duty arising out of the relation are determinable solely under the provisions of the act, and are not determinable at common law. Code, § 114-103; Webb v. Tubize-Chatillon Corp., 45 Ga. App. 744 (165 S. E. 775); Stebbins v. Georgia Veneer & Pkg. Co., 51 Ga. App. 56 (179 S. E. 649).
2. Where the employer and employee are subject to the workmen’s compensation act, it is presumed that they have accepted…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Pinkerton National Detective Agency v. WalkerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1924
- Keen v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1925
- Webb v. Tubize-Chatillon Corp.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1932
- McCoy v. Southern Lumber Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1928
- Stebbins v. Georgia Veneer & Package Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1935
3Cited by14 opinions
- Heskett v. Fisher Laundry & Cleaners Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1950
- Southern Wire & Iron, Inc. v. FowlerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1962
- Echols v. Chattooga Mercantile CompanyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1946
- Fowler v. Southern Wire & Iron, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1961
- Mitchell v. Hercules IncorporatedDistrict Court, S.D. Georgia · 1976
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.