Legal Opinion
Fleischman Const. Co. v. Burns
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided November 8, 1922No. 3638PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DONAHUE, Circuit Judge.
The defendant in error obtained a judgment in the District Court against the plaintiff in error, for damages for personal injuries received by him while in the employ of the Fleischman Construction Company as a bricklayer engaged in the erection of a theater building in Cleveland, Ohio.
It is admitted that at the time Burns sustained these injuries that his employer, the Fleischman Construction Company, had complied with the Workmen’s Compensation Law of Ohio, and that under the provisions of that law (sections 1465 — 70, 1465 — 76, G. C.) Burns would have no right of…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Enterprise Irrigation District v. Farmers Mutual Canal Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1917
- Fairfield v. County of GallatinSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. MeeseSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Nickel v. ColeSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- McWeeny v. Standard Boiler & Plate Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1914
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Le Sueur v. Manufacturers' Finance Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1922
- Roberds, Inc. v. Broyhill Furniture (In Re Roberds, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio · 2004