Legal Opinion

Baker v. St. Louis Smelting & Refining Co.

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided March 6, 1937No. 33,045PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Thiele, J.:

This was a proceeding under the workmen’s compensation act.

The question presented on this appeal arises thus: On the hearing before the commissioner and after both claimant and respondent had rested, respondent moved for the appointment of a neutral physician to examine claimant. The motion was allowed, the exami*274nation had and written report made. Thereafter respondent asked permission to cross-examine the neutral physician, which was granted, and at such examination one of the physicians testified concerning particular physical conditions…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Riverside & Dan River Cotton Mills v. MenefeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
  2. Moeser v. ShunkSupreme Court of Kansas · 1924
  3. Shade v. Ash Grove Lime & Portland Cement Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1914
  4. Shade v. Ash Grove Lime & Portland Cement Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1914
  5. Fougnie v. Wilbert & Schreeb Coal Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1930

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Ellis v. Kroger Grocery & Baking Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1944
  2. Hilburn v. Enerpipe Ltd.Supreme Court of Kansas · 2019
  3. Hormann v. New Hampshire InsuranceSupreme Court of Kansas · 1984
  4. Leslie v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1956
  5. Boyd v. Barton Transfer & Storage, Inc.Court of Appeals of Kansas · 1978

7 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