Legal Opinion

Clinton v. Hake

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided November 29, 1947PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice BurNett

The appellants, some 250 employees of Knox Porcelain Corporation, sought compensation benefits under the Unemployment Compensation Law, Chap. 1, Public Acts of Extra Session of 1936, as amended, now carried as Code secs. 6901.1 through 6901.24, while they were out of work on a strike due to a labor dispute. "We will refer to the appellants as claimants, the appellee Hake, as commissioner, and appellee and appellant Knox Porcelain Corporation as company.

On July 1,1946, the claimants went on a strike because their representative and the company could not agree on certain wage increases and…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Haynes v. Unemployment Compensation CommissionSupreme Court of Missouri · 1944
  2. Dale v. HartmanTennessee Supreme Court · 1928
  3. Nat. Optical Stores Co., Inc. v. BryantTennessee Supreme Court · 1944
  4. Reese v. HakeTennessee Supreme Court · 1947
  5. Ezell v. HakeTennessee Supreme Court · 1947

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Producers Produce Co. v. Industrial Commission of Missouri Division of Employment SecuritySupreme Court of Missouri · 1956
  2. Moulton v. Iowa Employment Security CommissionSupreme Court of Iowa · 1948
  3. Capra v. Carpenter Paper Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1960
  4. Moore v. Commissioner of Employment SecurityTennessee Supreme Court · 1954
  5. Spence v. Iowa Employment Security CommissionSupreme Court of Iowa · 1957

5 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