Legal Opinion
Aycock Hosiery Mills v. Maryland Casualty Co.
Tennessee Supreme Court
Decided December 8, 1928PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Cook
The complainant, observing sections 41 and 42 of the Workmen’s -Compensation Act, covered its'risks by insurance with the defendant and this action arose from the relation of defendant, the insurer, and complainant, the insured employer, under a policy wherein the insurer agreed:
“I. To pay to the person and in the manner provided therein, any sum due or to become due from this employer because of any such injuries, including death resulting- therefrom, under certain Statutes cited and described in endorsements attached to this policy, each of which Statutes is herein referred to as the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Western Union Telegraph Co. v. AusbrooksTennessee Supreme Court · 1923
- Hurt v. LongTennessee Supreme Court · 1891
- Wilson v. SchaeferTennessee Supreme Court · 1901
- Attleboro Mfg. Co. v. Frankport Marine Accident & Plate Glass Ins.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1909
- Cody v. Roane Iron Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1900
3Cited by19 opinions
- Southern Fire & Casualty Co. v. NorrisCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1952
- Johnson v. Hardware Mutual Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1938
- Goings v. Aetna Casualty and Surety CompanyCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1972
- Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company v. Therion Omer WoodCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1960
- Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance v. HammondCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1957
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.