Legal Opinion

Lindhout v. Brochu & Hass

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided October 5, 1931No. Docket No. 123, Calendar No. 35,717PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtButzel, C. J.

Brochu & Hass, employer, and General Casualty & Surety Company, insurer, dé fendants, appeal from the award of the department of labor and industry, to John Lindhout, employee and plaintiff, for the loss of an eye. A piece of steel, chipped from a hammer, penetrated the cornea of the plaintiff’s eye while he was at work at his trade of tool and die maker, and was removed with a magnet. A cataract developed and was subsequently removed by an operation. The eyesight of the injured eye was destroyed, but with the use of a proper lens the vision was restored and increased about 25 per cent.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Liimatta v. Calumet & Hecla Mining Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1924
  2. Hayes v. Motor Wheel CorporationMichigan Supreme Court · 1926
  3. Powers v. Motor Wheel Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1931
  4. Suggs v. Ternstedt Manufacturing Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1925
  5. Banker v. Chevrolet Motor Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1928

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Miller v. Sullivan Milk Products, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1971
  2. Rench v. Kalamazoo Stove & Furnace Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1938
  3. Mitchell v. Metal Assemblies, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1967
  4. Marrs v. Ford Motor Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1946
  5. Bilsky v. Mutual Benefit Health & Accident Ass'nAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1944

10 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