Legal Opinion

Stahmann v. Maryland Casualty Co.

New Mexico Supreme Court

Decided April 8, 1940No. 4495Published

1Concurrence · SadlerSadler, Justice

(specially concurring).

I concur in the result but disagree with' the portion of the statement in the opinion-’•to be italicized in the quotation to follow: “The injuries referred to [in sec. 1(b) of the policy] are those for which an employer would be called upon to respond under the Workmen’s Compensation Law, as well as any common law liability ”

Rather, I concur in the view accepted by counsel for both parties in the cause before us succinctly expressed by counsel for appellant (plaintiff below) in his brief in chief that paragraph 1(b): “* * * of necessity means damages incurred by reason…

Also in this document: Concurrence · Brice.

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Wood v. Employers' Liability Assurance Corp.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1930

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

Powered by the Exa API