Hallenbeck v. Butler
Supreme Court of Colorado
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Holland
Butler, the defendant in error, an employee of Hallenbeck, plaintiff in error, filed with the Industrial Commission a claim, which it now appears, is limited largely to payment of medical services for the treatment of his eyes rendered necessary, as it is alleged, by either an “injury” to his eyes or an “occupational disease” as may be determined under the Workmen’s Compensation Act. Reference will be made to him herein as claimant, and since it will be unnecessary to refer to any of the plaintiffs in error, other than Hallenbeek and the Industrial Commission, the former will be mentioned by…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Columbine Laundry Co. v. Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 1923
- U.S. Co. v. Ind. Com.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1924
- Industrial Commission v. UleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1935
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 1924
3Cited by8 opinions
- Connecticut General Life Insurance v. JohnsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Anderson v. BrinkhoffSupreme Court of Colorado · 1993
- Gates v. Central City Opera House Ass'nSupreme Court of Colorado · 1940
- Great American Indemnity Co. v. State Compensation Insurance FundSupreme Court of Colorado · 1941
- Cason v. American Brake Shoe & Foundry Co.District Court, D. Colorado · 1940
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.