Legal Opinion · Dissent

Arnold v. Ogle Construction Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 2, 1952No. Docket 9, Calendar 44,833Published

1DissentNorth, C. J.

In considering this appeal Mr. Justice Carr has concluded that plaintiff is not entitled to further compensation. I cannot agree with that result. The ground of my Brother’s holding seems to be as follows: “In his application for adjustment of claim plaintiff did not allege that the injury referred to was accidentally suffered or was accompanied by any fortuitous circumstance ;” and the further fact that notwithstanding plaintiff testified his injury did result from an accident (slipping) the commission did not expressly so find as a basis of awarding compensation. The controlling issue is…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Hagopian v. City of Highland ParkMichigan Supreme Court · 1946
  2. Surtman v. Secretary of StateMichigan Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Anderson v. General Motors Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1946
  4. Common Council v. SchmidMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
  5. Kasarewski v. Hupp Motor Car Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1946

2 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