Legal Opinion

Bloom's Case

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided January 13, 1916PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDe Courcy, J.

There was ample evidence to warrant the findings of the Industrial Accident Board that the personal injuries *435received by the employee Fred Bloom arose out of and in the course of his employment; and that he suffered total loss of vision in the left eye and total incapacity for work. Apparently it is not disputed that the compensation awarded was proper, if he is entitled to recover.

The workmen’s compensation act (St. 1911, c. 751, as amended by St. 1912, cc. 172, 571) provides in Part II, § 15, “No proceedings for compensation for an injury under this act shall be maintained unless a notice…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Diaz's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
  2. Shea v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1899
  3. Daw v. LallyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1913
  4. Hawks v. DavisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1904

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Bates & Rogers Construction Co. v. AllenCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1919
  2. Brown's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1917
  3. Van Treeck v. Travelers InsuranceSupreme Court of Georgia · 1924
  4. Murphy's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1917
  5. Fierro's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916

14 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