Legal Opinion

McKnight v. Houck

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided March 17, 1930No. 12,512PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Burke

This is an Industrial Commission case, and we hereinafter refer to plaintiff in error as plaintiff, to her deceased son, Pay Clifford McKnight, as Pay, to defendant in error Houck as Dr. Houck, to the Industrial Commission of Colorado as the commission, and to one Howard Arnot as Howard.

While employed on the ranch of Dr. Houck, Fay was killed by a pistol in the hands of Howard, a fellow employee. All were, admittedly, within the terms of our industrial compensation act, and plaintiff filed her claim thereunder. Referee, commission and court, have each in turn found against her. To review the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Prouse v. Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 1920
  2. Industrial Commission v. AndersonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1917
  3. Industrial Commission v. EnyeartSupreme Court of Colorado · 1927

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Leroy Stewart v. United States of America, Gary D. Nuss, and Rockwell International Corporation, a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1982
  2. Rocky Mountain Fuel Co. v. KruzicSupreme Court of Colorado · 1934
  3. Gates Rubber Co. v. Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 1944
  4. Kitchens v. Department of Labor & EmploymentColorado Court of Appeals · 1971
  5. Miller v. Denver Post, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1958

4 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