Crossett School District v. Gourley
Court of Appeals of Arkansas
1DissentJohn Mauzy Pittman, Judge
The Commission found that although appellee’s exposure to mold in the classroom was not peculiar to her occupation as a teacher, the exposure was “peculiar or characteristic of this particular employment in that [appellee’s] employment exposed her to a greater risk of that disease.” An occupational disease must be “due to the nature of an employment in which the hazards of the disease actually exist and are characteristic thereof and peculiar to the trade, occupation, process, or employment.” (Emphasis added). Ark. Code Ann. § ll-9-601(g)(l) (1987). Although the hazard of the disease need not…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Sanyo Manufacturing Corp. v. LeisureCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1984
- Osmose Wood Preserving v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1992
- Chadwick v. Public Service Co. of NMNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1986
- Hope Brick Works v. WelchCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1991
- Dando v. Binghamton Board of EducationAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.