Legal Opinion

Tintic Milling Co. v. Industrial Commission

Utah Supreme Court

Decided April 8, 1922No. 3770PublishedCited by 60 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtThurman, J.

Clarence Snyder, an employé of plaintiff Tintic Milling Company, on the 4th day of August, 1921, filed with the defendant Commission application for an adjustment of his claim for compensation for an alleged accidental injury arising out of or in the course of his employment. After a hearing was duly and regularly had thereon the Commission entered its findings of fact and conclusions in favor of the applicant, and made its award in accordance therewith. Application for rehearing was denied, and the case brought to this court on writ of review.

The findings of fact and conclusions therefrom…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Gilliland v. Ash Grove Lime & Portland Cement Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1919
  2. Adams v. Acme White Lead & Color WorksMichigan Supreme Court · 1914
  3. Carroll v. Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 1920
  4. Patrick v. J. B. Ham Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1921
  5. Tarr v. Hecla Coal & Coke Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920

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

3Cited by60 opinions

  1. Allen v. Industrial CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Barron v. Texas Employers' Ins. Ass'nTexas Commission of Appeals · 1931
  3. Pierce v. Phelps Dodge Corp.Arizona Supreme Court · 1933
  4. Matter of MitchellArizona Supreme Court · 1944
  5. Purity Biscuit Co. v. Industrial CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1949

55 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