Legal Opinion

Mays Plus, Inc. v. Ennis

Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma

Decided March 3, 2006No. 102,642PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

CAROL M. HANSEN, Judge:

¶ 1 Petitioners, Mays Plus, Inc. and American Home Assurance Company (collectively Employer), seek review of a Workers’ Compensation Court (WCC) order which, inter alia, found Respondent, Anna Ennis (Claimant) was in need of continuing medical maintenance. We hold there was no error of law in a three-judge panel allowing relief requested in a supplemental appeal filed more than ten days after the trial court’s order. Because the order is supported by competent evidence, we sustain.

¶ 2 Employer admitted Claimant sustained a compensable injury and provided…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. City of Durant v. CicioSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2002
  2. Fink v. State Ex Rel. Department of Public SafetyCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1992
  3. Transwestern Oil Co. v. PartainSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1940
  4. Independent Finance Institute v. ClarkSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1999
  5. Burns v. Yuba Heat Transfer Corp.Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1980

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. L.E. Jones Drilling Co. v. HodgeCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2013
  2. RENFRO ELECTRIC v. SEXTONCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2014
  3. Maxwell v. Faith Transport, LLCCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2015
  4. RENFRO ELECTRIC v. SEXTONCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2014

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API