Legal Opinion

Canon Reliance Coal Co. v. Industrial Commission

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided December 4, 1922No. 10,495PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Burke

While employed by the coal company (plaintiff in error), John Seitz was struck in the face by a piece of coal. Later a cancer, carcinoma, developed there from which he died. The referee of the Industrial Commission awarded his widow, Mabel Seitz (defendant in error), $3,125.00 which was reduced by the commission and later by the judgment of the district court to $2,313.22, and otherwise affirmed. To review that judgment this writ is prose*478cuted. The errors assigned are that the commission acted without, or in excess of, its powers, and that its findings of fact do not support the award. For…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Passini v. Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 1918
  2. Picardi v. Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 1921
  3. Rath v. VaughanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
  4. Brock-Haffner Press Co. v. Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 1920

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Industrial Commission v. HavensSupreme Court of Colorado · 1957
  2. Industrial Commission v. Corwin HospitalSupreme Court of Colorado · 1952
  3. Stordahl v. Rush Implement CompanyMontana Supreme Court · 1966
  4. Winchester Milling Corp. v. SencindiverSupreme Court of Virginia · 1927
  5. Bruins v. Brandon Canning Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1934

6 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