Legal Opinion

Dolan v. Kent Research & Manufacturing Co.

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland

Decided May 9, 1985No. 891, September Term, 1984PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ROSALYN B. BELL, Judge.

What started as a typical workmen’s compensation claim has become more complex, because the employee sustained his injuries while on property owned by a subsidiary of his employer company. Following the resolution of the claim the employee and his wife sued the subsidiary in tort. As a result, we must consider whether the subsidiary shares the immunity of the parent company by virtue of the relationship of the two corporations. The Workmen’s Compensation Act provides that an employer who complies with the Act remains immune from a common-law action in tort. Md.Code…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Keitz v. National Paving & Contracting Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1957
  2. Kennedy v. CrouchCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1948
  3. Honaker v. W. C. & A. N. Miller Development Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1979
  4. MacKall v. Zayre Corp.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1982
  5. Dixon v. Process Corp.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1978

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Murray International Freight Corp. v. GrahamCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1989
  2. Volb v. G.E. Capital Corp.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1995
  3. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. ImbraguglioCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1997
  4. McClelland v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.District Court, D. Maryland · 1990
  5. Imbraguglio v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1996

2 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