Legal Opinion

Rezaldo v. Industrial Commission

Utah Supreme Court

Decided March 17, 1923No. 3898PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFrick, J.

Plaintiff made application to this court for a writ of review directed to tbe Industrial 'Commission of Utab, hereinafter called Commission.

Tbe record of the proceedings bad before tbe Commission has been duly certified, and tbe case was submitted by tbe respective parties to this court upon the record as certified, which discloses that on April 30, 1921, tbe plaintiff wrote a letter which in due time was delivéred to tbe Commission, although it was not addressed to any one in particular. Tbe letter, including tbe date and address of the plaintiff, reads as follows:

“Holy Cross, April 30, 1921.

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Spring Canyon Coal Co. v. Industrial CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1921
  2. Utah Consol. Mining Co. v. Industrial Commission of UtahUtah Supreme Court · 1920
  3. Inter-Urban Const. Co. v. Industrial CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1921

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Palle v. Industrial CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Higgins v. Heine Boiler Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1931
  3. Young v. HoageDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1937
  4. Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Ind. Com.Utah Supreme Court · 1925
  5. Hardy v. Industrial Commission of UtahUtah Supreme Court · 1936

3 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