Baker v. St. Louis Smelting & Refining Co.
Supreme Court of Kansas
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
- Riverside & Dan River Cotton Mills v. MenefeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Moeser v. ShunkSupreme Court of Kansas · 1924
- Shade v. Ash Grove Lime & Portland Cement Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1914
- Shade v. Ash Grove Lime & Portland Cement Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1914
- Fougnie v. Wilbert & Schreeb Coal Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1930
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Ellis v. Kroger Grocery & Baking Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1944
- Hilburn v. Enerpipe Ltd.Supreme Court of Kansas · 2019
- Hormann v. New Hampshire InsuranceSupreme Court of Kansas · 1984
- Leslie v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1956
- Boyd v. Barton Transfer & Storage, Inc.Court of Appeals of Kansas · 1978
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.