Legal Opinion

Prentice v. Schindler Elevator Co.

Court of Appeals of Mississippi

Decided June 24, 2008No. 2007-WC-00815-COAPublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GRIFFIS, J.,

for the Court.

¶ 1. Timmy Prentice filed a petition to controvert with the Mississippi Workers’ Compensation Commission. Schindler Elevator Company, the employer, and Zurich American Insurance Company, the insurer, responded by filing a motion to dismiss based on the statute of limitations. The Commission denied Schindler’s motion. On appeal, the circuit court reversed the Commission’s decision and dismissed Prentice’s claim finding that the statute of limitations had run. On appeal, Prentice argues that the circuit court erred because Schindler is estopped from asserting the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Hale v. Ruleville Health Care CenterMississippi Supreme Court · 1997
  2. South Cent. Bell Telephone Co. v. AdenMississippi Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Robinson v. Packard Elec. Div. GMCMississippi Supreme Court · 1988
  4. Martin v. L. & A. CONTRACTING CO.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1964
  5. Holbrook v. Albright Mobile Homes, Inc.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1997

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Prentice v. Schindler Elevator Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 2009
  2. Prentice v. Schindler Elevator Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Timmy Prentice v. Schindler Elevator CorporationMississippi Supreme Court · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API