Carter v. Associated Petroleum Carriers
Supreme Court of South Carolina
1DissentTaylor, Justice
I regret I am unable to agree with the majority opinion in this case. The Workmen’s Compensation Act was enacted for the benefit of the employee and his dependents, the employer, and the public generally but not the insurance carrier whose liability runs directly to the insured employee; hence, it should be estopped from advantaging itself through some delict of the employer.
This appeal comes from an order of the Court of Common Pleas for York County affirming an award of the South Carolina Industrial Commission, wherein the Duncan Oil Company, as employer, and the Iowa Mutual Insurance…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Ham v. Mullins Lumber Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1940
- Alewine v. Tobin Quarries, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1945
- Yeomans v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1941
- Gaskins v. Firemen's Ins. Co. of Newark, N.J.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1945
- Horton v. BARUCHSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1950
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.