Legal Opinion

Murphy's Case

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided March 10, 1967PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWhittemore, J.

1. We cannot rule that there was no evidence to connect the claimant’s peritonitis, following a double operation for hernia and appendicitis, with the employment connected hernia. Two physicians gave opinions adequate to support the single member’s finding. We may not weigh the testimony of the surgeon, called by the insurer, tending to show that the appendicitis arose from usual causes of infection of the appendix, unrelated to the hernia; that the operation was separate from the repair of the hernia; and that the peritonitis came from the appendectomy.

2. The injury occurred December 28,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Ahmed's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932
  2. Clark v. ChildMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1884
  3. Atwood v. WalkerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1901
  4. Town of Swampscott v. RemisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1966
  5. Hopkins v. ShepardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Morris v. Watsco, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
  2. Bernier v. Boston Edison Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1980
  3. Porter v. Clerk of the Superior CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
  4. Smith v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation AuthorityMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2012
  5. American Mutual Liability Insurance v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1979

9 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