Legal Opinion

Williams v. Paramount Coal Co.

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided May 28, 1925No. 6 Div. 336PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THOMAS, X

The findings of fact being too meager to fully inform this court in respect to the previous weekly earnings of Tom Williams, the bill of exceptions is considered. Ex parte Mt. Carmel Coal Co., 209 Ala. 519, 96 So. 626. In Woodward Iron Co. v. Bradford, 206 Ala. 447, 90 So. 803, Ex parte H. T. Smith Lumber Co., 206 Ala. 485, 90 So. 807, and Ex parte Sloss-Sheffield S. & I. Co. (Greek’s Case), 207 Ala. 219, 92 So. 458, it was declared of adjudications under the Workmen’s Compensation Act (Laws 1919, p. 206) that, where there is “any legal evidence to support the finding, such finding…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Woodward Iron Co. v. BradfordSupreme Court of Alabama · 1921
  2. Greek v. Sloss-Sheffield Steel & Iron Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1922
  3. Ex Parte W. T. Smith Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1921
  4. Miller v. Mt. Carmel Coal Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1923

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Ex Parte Big Four Coal Mining Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1925
  2. Paramount Coal Co. v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1926
  3. Woodward Iron Co. v. DeanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1928
  4. Sloss-Sheffield Steel & Iron Co. v. HouseSupreme Court of Alabama · 1928
  5. Republic Iron & Steel Co. v. ReedSupreme Court of Alabama · 1931

9 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