Legal Opinion

Reed v. Township of Monticello

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided October 2, 1925No. 24,745PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Lees, C.

While respondent was engaged in cutting brush beside a town road in the town of Monticello, one of his fingers was pierced by a thorn. Infection followed and the finger was amputated. Some months later respondent claimed compensation from the town under the Workmen’s Compensation Act. The Industrial Commission allowed the claim, and a writ of certiorari brings the order of the commission before us for review. The principal question presented is whether the relator and the respondent bore to each other the relation of employer and employe, as those terms are defined by G. S. 1923, §…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Vermeule v. City of CorningAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1919
  2. Currie v. School-District No. 26Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1886
  3. Schmidt v. County of StearnsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
  4. Steiner v. Polk CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1901
  5. Tracy Cement Tile Co. v. City of TracySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1919

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Gahr v. StroutSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1930
  2. Cardinal v. Prudential Insurance Co. of North AmericaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1932
  3. Sexton v. County of WasecaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1941
  4. Gabler v. Township of BerthaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
  5. Fukuda v. Peerless Roofing Co.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1974

1 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