Legal Opinion

Mize v. Sangamo Electric Co.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided July 26, 1965No. 18384PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Taylor, Chief Justice.

The Respondent-employee claims benefits under the South Carolina Workmen’s Compensation Act for partial and permanent disability resulting from an alleged accident arising out of and in the course of her employment with Appellant, Sangamo Electric Company. Appellants resisted the claim on the grounds that notice to the employer was riot given as required by Section 72-301, Code of Laws of South Carolina, 1962, that claim was not filed with the Industrial Commission as required by: Section 72-303, Code of Laws of South Carolina, 1962, and that the claimed injury of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Drake v. Raybestos-Manhattan, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1962
  2. Gray v. LAURENS MILLSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1957
  3. Hoke v. Cherokee CountySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1950
  4. Harpe v. KLINE IRON & METAL WORKSSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1951

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Aristizabal v. I. J. Woodside-Division of Dan River, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1977
  2. Mize v. Sangamo Electric Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1968
  3. Dawkins v. Capitol Construction Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1967
  4. Dawkins v. Capitol Construction Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1967
  5. Mize v. Sangamo Electric Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1968

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API