Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Logan-Cache Knitting Mills v. Industrial Commission

Utah Supreme Court

Decided May 4, 1940No. 6130Published

1ConcurrenceWolfe, Justice

The first proposition on which the decision is based seems to be that the claimant must give a “cause” for not working under the contract, whatever its nature may be, so long as it is not terminated. Evidently in this case the claimant terminated his employment without expressly terminating the contract. A contract, of course, may be terminated by conduct even in the face of provisions specifying that it may be terminated by notice. But on the assumption that the contract was still in existence and hence constituted a refuge to which claimant might return, I cannot concur in the conclusions…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. Crowell v. BensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  2. Binderup v. Pathe Exchange, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1923
  3. Hillen v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
  4. Uphoff v. Industrial BoardIllinois Supreme Court · 1915
  5. Atwood v. Cox, District JudgeUtah Supreme Court · 1936

29 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