Legal Opinion

City of Kendallville v. Twining

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided April 5, 1946No. 28,178Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion

O’Malley, J.

With all due respect to the majority members of this court, I feel that in this particular case they are in error.

The compensation act is remedial, to compel industry to bear part of the loss occasioned by injury or death of persons it employs. Its further purpose is to lift some of the “loss-load” from the backs of the widows and dependent children of workmen who lose their lives while working at their job.

It seems that a liberal construction of the act is required if it is to approach the performance of the purpose and function intended by those who fostered…

Also in this document: Concurring in part, dissenting in part.

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Citizens Trust & Savings Bank v. Fletcher American Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1934
  2. Miller v. Binkley Mining Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1934
  3. Fleschner v. FaggIndiana Court of Appeals · 1932
  4. Lenne v. Binkley Mining Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1933

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API