Legal Opinion

Farrin v. State Industrial Accident Commission

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided April 4, 1922PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.

The Workmen’s Compensation Act of Oregon provides that:

“ * * The term ‘employer,’ used in this act, shall be taken to mean any person,. firm or corporation, including receiver, administrator, executor or trustee, that shall contract for and secure the right to direct and control the services of any person, and the term ‘workman’ shall be taken to mean any person, male or female, who shall engage to furnish his or her services subject to the direction or control of an employer. * * ” Section 6619, Or. L.
*461“The hazardous occupations to which this act is applicable are as follows:
“ (a) Factories,…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Randall v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
  2. People v. GarbuttMichigan Supreme Court · 1868
  3. Phoenix Ins. Co. v. DosterSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
  4. Galvin v. Brown & McCabeOregon Supreme Court · 1909
  5. Stark v. State Industrial Accident CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1922

25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Lamm v. Silver Falls Timber Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1929
  2. Brady v. Oregon Lumber Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1925
  3. Bolt v. Influence, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 2002
  4. Cooper v. North Coast Power Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1926
  5. Saylor v. Enterprise Electric Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1924

29 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