Industrial Commission v. Mounjoy
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtLemert, J.
From an examination of the record in this case, it would seem that the first complaint is based upon a mere naked conclusion. Whether the decedent in this case suffered a blister on his foot, and what produced that blister, was a matter of fact in the instant case and was put squarely up to the Jury. If the decedent suffered a blister on his foot because of having to walk' over rough ground, in the course of his employment, there could be no question but what that would be an injury within the meaning of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. just as much as a sunstroke or a heat-stroke, in such…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Painesville Utopia Theatre Co. v. LautermilchOhio Supreme Court · 1928
- Industrial Commission v. TripsanskyOhio Supreme Court · 1929
3Cited by4 opinions
- Paulley v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1962
- Moore v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1937
- Claim of Walters v. U. S. Vitamin Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1960
- Indust Comm. v. EdwardsonOhio Court of Appeals · 1933