Legal Opinion

Bristow Cotton Oil Co. v. State Industrial Commission

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided March 16, 1920No. 9120PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Action to reverse award by State Industrial Commission of compensation for personal injuries to Joe Tapp. Action prosecuted by the Bristow Cotton Oil Company and another.

1Opinion of the CourtOwen, C. J.

There is no dispute that Joe Tapp sustained an injury to his hand while in the employ of the Bristow Cotton Oil Company, necessitating amputation of four fingers and a portion of the palm. The commission made an award for the loss of the use of his hand, and it is urged this award is not supported by the evidence.

Counsel for petitioners state in their brief:

“The only proposition which we care to present before this court for determination is the power of the Industrial Commission to find that loss of the use of the left hand was a fact, under the evidence.”

The evidence was to the effect that…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Claim of Feinman v. Albert Manufacturing Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1915
  2. Hill v. WineAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Choctaw Portland Cement Co. v. LambSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920
  2. MAXWELL v. SPRINT PCSSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2016
  3. Moses v. National Union Coal Mining Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1921
  4. State, Ex Rel. v. Ind. Com.Ohio Supreme Court · 1946
  5. Livingston Oil Corporation v. HensonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1922

3 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