Legal Opinion

Moen v. Melin

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided March 17, 1930PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNuessle, J.

The plaintiff brought this action to recover on account of injuries received by her while’ in the employ of the defendant. In her complaint she alleged the fact of her employment by the defendant; that she was injured in the course of such employment; that such injuries were due to the negligence of the defendant; that the defendant had not complied with the provisions of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, chapter 162, Session Laws 1919, as amended (§§ 396al — 396a33, inclusive, 1925 Supplement). The defendant, answering, denied that she had employed the plaintiff and that the plaintiff was…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Dushek v. WatlandNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1924
  2. Fahler v. City of MinotNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1923
  3. Curren v. StoryNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1918
  4. Lilly v. Haynes Co-operative Coal Mining Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1923
  5. Kiley v. MecklerNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1928

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Holten Ex Rel. Holten v. AmsdenNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Stevenson v. DourosSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1931
  3. Bartholomay v. St. Thomas Lumber CompanyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1963
  4. Rosebear v. AndersonDistrict Court, D. North Dakota · 1956
  5. Kempel v. StreichNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1972

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

Powered by the Exa API