Legal Opinion

Fair v. Golden Rule Refining Co.

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided January 30, 1932No. 30,395PublishedCited by 35 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Harvey, J.:

This is a workmen’s compensation case. The compensation commissioner heard the evidence, made findings and denied compensation, stating:

“The evidence herein does not sustain a finding that the alleged injury . resulted in the disability complained of by claimant, the disability being partial paralysis.”

The claimant appealed to the district court. The court found for claimant, stating, among other things:

“I might add that I have had considerable difficulty in reaching a decision in this case for the reason that the apparent preponderance of…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Cox v. Kansas City Refining Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1921
  2. Corpora v. Kansas City Public Service Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1930
  3. Shay v. HillSupreme Court of Kansas · 1931
  4. Chop v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1925
  5. Major v. MajorSupreme Court of Kansas · 1864

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by35 opinions

  1. Myers v. Shell Petroleum Corp.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1941
  2. Holler v. W. S. Dickey Clay Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1943
  3. Carney v. HellarSupreme Court of Kansas · 1942
  4. Hogan v. Santa Fe Trail Transportation Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1938
  5. Hill v. Etchen Motor Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1936

30 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