Legal Opinion

A. C. Lawrence Leather Co. v. Barnhill

Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976)

Decided May 30, 1933PublishedCited by 36 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion op the Court by

Judge Richardson

Affirming.

The A.’ C. Lawrence Leather Company is insisting that, whether the facts of the case be considered as disputed or undisputed, the award of the Compensation Board, brought here for review, is^jmroneous,.. because it is without any evidence to support.it: based entirely on conjecture, surmise, and guess, and because of the failure of the board to comply with section 4880, Ky. Stats. It argues that the evidence does not show a compensable injury; i. e., (1) the injury did not arise out of nor (2) in the course of his employment, and (3) was caused…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Phil Hollenbach Co. v. HollenbachCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1918
  2. Archibald v. Workmen's Compensation CommissionerWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1916
  3. Whiting-Mead Commercial Co. v. Indus. Accident Comm'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
  4. Rayner v. Sligh Furniture Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1914
  5. Bates & Rogers Construction Co. v. AllenCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1919

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

3Cited by36 opinions

  1. Marks v. Hardware Dealers Mutual Fire Insurance Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1967
  2. Lappinen v. Union Ore Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1947
  3. Harlan Collieries Co. v. ShellCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1951
  4. Ratliff v. EplingCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1966
  5. Finley v. St. Louis Smelting & Refining Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1950

31 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