Legal Opinion
Central Surety & Insurance v. Industrial Commission
Supreme Court of Colorado
Decided October 22, 1928No. 12,141PublishedCited by 36 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Butler
The Industrial Commission awarded workmen’s compensation to Peterson P. Fugitt. The district court confirmed the award. The injury suffered by Fugitt was hernia. Section'80 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act (C. L., § 4454, as amended by S. L. 1923, p. 744) provides: “An employee in order to be entitled to compensation for hernia must clearly prove: first, that its appearance was accompanied by pain; second, that it was immediately preceded by some accidental strain suffered in the course of the employment.”
On October 27, 1927, Fugitt was working for plaintiffs in error Suwyn and Bitsema. He…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Gilliland v. Ash Grove Lime & Portland Cement Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1919
- Matter of Jordan v. . Decorative Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1921
- Carroll v. Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 1920
- Patrick v. J. B. Ham Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1921
- La Veck v. Parke, Davis & Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1916
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by36 opinions
- Kandt v. EvansSupreme Court of Colorado · 1982
- Lucedale Veneer Co. v. RogersMississippi Supreme Court · 1950
- Almquist v. Shenandoah Nurseries, Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1934
- American International Vacations v. MacBrideNevada Supreme Court · 1983
- Industrial Commission v. Corwin HospitalSupreme Court of Colorado · 1952
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.