Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

J. E. Trigg Drilling Co. v. Daniels

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided October 26, 1943No. 31054Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partArnold, J.

I agree with the conclusion of the majority, that is, that the claimant is entitled to 400 weeks’compensation in this case. This conclusion is correct for the reason that the claimant makes no objection to the amount of compensation awarded him or the method by which it was computed, and, the two methods of computation suggested by petitioners are incorrect and inapplicable under the facts of the case before us. I cannot agree, however, that the majority opinion .is correct in holding that in the case of multiple injuries, resulting in the loss of an arm and a serious injury to the back…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Elk City Cotton Oil Co. v. State Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1939
  2. Colson Drilling Co. v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1937

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API