Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ames v. Department of Labor & Industries

Washington Supreme Court

Decided March 7, 1934No. 24703. En BancPublished

1DissentMitohell, J.

(dissenting) — I dissent from the views expressed in the decision. An injured workman, within the workmen’s compensation act, has no right of action against his employer, but is entitled to compensation under and according to the terms of the act. As stated in the decision, Rem. Rev. Stat., § 7697, which is a part of the act, provides:

“Any claimant, employer or other person aggrieved by any snch order, decision or award must, before he appeals to the courts, serve upon the director of labor and industries, by mail or personally, within sixty days from the day on which snch copy of such order,…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Vance v. VanceSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
  2. Winter v. . City of Niagara FallsNew York Court of Appeals · 1907
  3. State v. CareyWashington Supreme Court · 1892
  4. Touhey v. City of DecaturIndiana Supreme Court · 1911
  5. Born v. City of SpokaneWashington Supreme Court · 1902

25 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