Legal Opinion

Hammond v. Industrial Commission

Utah Supreme Court

Decided July 16, 1934No. 5366PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

An application by Hannah Giese Hammond on her behalf and of a minor son, Clarence E. Hammond, under our Workmen's Compensation Act (Comp. Laws 1917, § 3061 et seq., as amended), was filed before the Industrial Commission seeking compensation for the death of Harry Andrew Hammond, the husband and father of the applicants. Among other things it was alleged that the deceased at the time of the alleged injury and death was in the employ of Salt Lake City, and that the death was caused by reason of an accident arising out of or in the course of his employment. The employment was admitted, but it…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Insurance Co. v. MosleySupreme Court of the United States · 1869
  2. Northern Pacific Railroad v. UrlinSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
  3. Cromeenes v. San Pedro, Los Angeles & Salt Lake RailroadUtah Supreme Court · 1910
  4. North American Accident Insurance v. Hill's AdministratrixCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1918

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Allen v. Industrial CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Jones v. California Packing Corp.Utah Supreme Court · 1952
  3. Cody v. S.K.F. Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
  4. Purity Biscuit Co. v. Industrial CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1949
  5. Bober v. Independent Plating Corp.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1958

24 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