Legal Opinion
Armstead, Widow, Etc. v. Sommer, Etc.
Indiana Court of Appeals
Decided January 23, 1956No. 18,731PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtKendall, J.
The question presented by this appeal is: Was appellant’s decedent injured as the result of an accident causing his death arising out of and it the course of his employment with appellee?
Harry Armstead, appellant’s decedent, was engaged in duties as a maintenance man on an hourly basis for appellees on January 13, 1954. John M. Young was employed in appellee’s plant. Among the duties of Mr. Young was that of pushing steel through the plant on carts, and, in so doing, was required to push the cart down narrow aisles between machines. On the day in question, the deceased was welding and was…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Bryant v. FissellSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1913
- The Studebaker Corp. v. JonesIndiana Court of Appeals · 1937
- Union Sanitary Manufacturing Co. v. DavisIndiana Court of Appeals · 1917
- Magazine v. ShullIndiana Court of Appeals · 1945
- Polar Ice & Fuel Co. v. MulrayIndiana Court of Appeals · 1918
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Skinner v. MartinIndiana Court of Appeals · 1983
- Blaw-Knox Foundry & Mill MacHinery, Inc. v. DacusIndiana Court of Appeals · 1987
- Martin v. PowellIndiana Court of Appeals · 1985
- Nelson v. DenkinsIndiana Court of Appeals · 1992
- C. & E. TRUCKING CORP. v. StahlIndiana Court of Appeals · 1962
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.