Legal Opinion

Garbouska Case

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided August 31, 1925PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDunn, J.

Appeal from 'the denial of compensation under the Workmen’s Act.

The facts are uncontroverted. An answer denies the allegations of the petition and interposes bars. One is, that if this petitioner ever had right to compensation, enforcement of the right is prohibited, because neither the mutual and approved agreement of the *405parties nor petition therefor was seasonably filed. This only was the defense used before the Industrial Accident Commission. Being advanced as the sole conflicting point it is so accepted here. Thereby much is taken as granted, but there is ample reason.

On one day in the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Bushnell v. Industrial BoardIllinois Supreme Court · 1916
  2. Gorski's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1917
  3. Petraska v. National Acme Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1921
  4. Claim of Twonko v. Rome Brass & Copper Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1918
  5. Brown v. Weston-Mott Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1918

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Schrabauer v. Schneider Engraving Product, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1930
  2. Pine v. State Industrial Com.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1931
  3. Higgins v. Heine Boiler Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1931
  4. Bailey v. HessSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1929
  5. Landauer v. State Industrial Accident CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1944

4 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