Special Indemnity Fund v. Richardson
Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma
1Opinion of the Court
*533MEMORANDUM OPINION
ADAMS, Vice Chief Judge.
This review proceeding presents one legal issue for our consideration — the proper interpretation to be given 85 O.S.Supp.1993 § 171. Essentially, the question is: did the amendment of § 171 by the Legislature in 1993 effect a change in the definition of a physically impaired person?1
The Workers’ Compensation trial court found Claimant Tex Danny Richardson sustained 24.4 per cent permanent partial disability to the body as a whole from an employment-related low back injury sustained on July 6, 1994. The court also determined Claimant had a 35 per cent…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- J. C. Penney Co. v. CrumbySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1978
- Special Indemnity Fund v. FigginsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1992
- Special Indemnity Fund v. ArcherSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1993
- Special Indemnity Fund of the Oklahoma v. TylerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1961
- Special Indemnity Fund v. CarsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1993
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Miville v. Special Indemnity FundCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1997
- Lee v. Special Indemnity FundCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1998
- MULTIPLE INJURY TRUST FUND v. MACKEYSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2017
- MULTIPLE INJURY TRUST FUND v. MACKEYSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2017
- MULTIPLE INJURY TRUST FUND v. MACKEYSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2017
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.