Legal Opinion

Murphy v. Miettinen

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided February 5, 1945PublishedCited by 51 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWilkins, J.

This is an action of. tort for personal injuries caused by the negligent operation of an automobile by the defendant. The defence is that the plaintiff’s exclusive remedy is under the workmen’s compensation act. The judge found for the defendant, and reported the case to this court.

The facts appear from a case stated: The plaintiff and the defendant were both employed by Charles G. Allen Company in Barre. The plaintiff was hurt at 6 a.m. on March 5, 1942, in a parking lot owned by the employer adjacent to its'foundry and maintained by the employer for the use of its employees for parking…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Sundine's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
  2. Donovan's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
  3. Von Ette's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
  4. White v. E. T. Slattery Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
  5. Souza's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1944

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

3Cited by51 opinions

  1. Canter v. Koehring CompanySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1973
  2. O'CONNELL v. ChasdiMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1987
  3. Chmelik v. VanaIllinois Supreme Court · 1964
  4. Warner v. LederSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  5. Moore's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1953

46 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