Legal Opinion
Shockley v. Morristown Produce & Ice Co.
Tennessee Supreme Court
Decided December 8, 1928PublishedCited by 39 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Chambmss
This is a suit under the Workmen’s Compensation ‘Statute. The facts, as found by the Chancellor, are as follows :
“The complainant, Mrs. Ollie Shockley, is the widow of W. P. Shockley, deceased. Jesse, Joseph and Beaman Shockley, who sue by their next friend, are minor children of W. P. Shockley and Ollie Shockley, and all dependents of W. P. Shockley. The said W.. P. Shockley at the date of his death and prior thereto was employed under contract regularly by defendant Company, and had been for nineteen or twenty years. A part of the business of the defendant corporation was to buy, sell and…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Bryant v. FissellSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1913
- North Memphis Sav. Bank v. Union Bridge & Construction Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1917
- East Tennessee & Western North Carolina Railroad v. LindamoodTennessee Supreme Court · 1903
- Hendricks v. CallowaySupreme Court of Missouri · 1908
- White v. BatesIllinois Supreme Court · 1908
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- Provident Life & Accident Ins. v. PrietoTennessee Supreme Court · 1935
- Hayes v. GillTennessee Supreme Court · 1965
- Harper v. WatkinsCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1983
- Milstead v. KaylorTennessee Supreme Court · 1948
- Southern Motors, Inc. v. MortonCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1941
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.