Hasslen v. Carlson & Hasslen
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
Taylor, C.
The relator made an application under the workmen’s compensation law for compensation for the loss of an eye. The industrial commission found as a fact that the injury did not arise out of and in the course of his employment and denied the application. A writ of certiorari brings the case to this court. The question presented is whether the evidence established as a matter of law that the injury arose out of and in the course of the employment.
John Carlson and Carl Hasslen, copartners as Carlson & Hasslen, are contractors and builders and have been engaged in that business for many…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- O'Leary v. WangensteenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1928
- Engsell v. Northern Motor Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1928
3Cited by8 opinions
- Farnam v. Linden Hills Congregational ChurchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1967
- Cavilla v. Northern States Power Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1942
- Rick v. NobleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1936
- Williams v. Hoyt Construction Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
- First National Bank v. Van De PutteSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1932
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.