Legal Opinion

Driessen v. Schiefelbein

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided April 29, 1941No. File No. 8420PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRudolph, J.

Plaintiff brought this proceeding to recover compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Law, SDC Title 64, 64.0101 et seq. The Industrial Commissioner denied an award, which was reversed upon appeal of the claimant to the circuit court. Defendants have now appealed.

The facts in the case are undisputed. In the fall of 1938 several farmers in the immediate vicinity of Milbank organized a “ring” to conduct threshing operations. The claimant, Driessen, was a member of this ring as was also the defendant, Schiefelbein. Schiefelbein owned and operated the threshing rig which was to be used to…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Meyer v. RoetteleSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1935
  2. Jacobson v. Strong & WaggonerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1939
  3. Moore v. Sefton Manufacturing Corp.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1924
  4. Pillen v. Workmen's Compensation BureauNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1931
  5. Stratton v. Interstate Fruit Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1924

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Krier v. Dick's Linoleum ShopSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1959
  2. South Dakota Public Entity Pool for Liability v. WingerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Pickrel v. Martin Beach, Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1963
  4. Lang v. Board of EducationSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1945
  5. Howell v. Cardinal Industries, Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1993

5 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