Legal Opinion

Bradtmiller v. Liquid Carbonic Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided February 3, 1928No. 26,398PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDibell, J.

Certiorari to review an order of the industrial commission awarding compensation to the plaintiff employe under the workmen’s compensation act.

1. The plaintiff -was in the employ of the Liquid Carbonic Company. The American Mutual Liability Insurance Company was the insurer. The carbonic company had an office in Minneapolis. The main place of business and office was at Chicago. Some property was kept at Minneapolis. The plaintiff was a salesman. He lived in Minneapolis. His sales territory was in South Dakota. He reported to the Minneapolis branch, received his instructions from it, and was…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. District Court of Hennepin CountySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1918
  2. Stansberry v. Monitor Stove Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1921
  3. State ex rel. McCarthy Bros. v. District CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1918
  4. Ginsburg v. ByersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
  5. State ex rel. Maryland Casualty Co. v. District Court of Rice CountySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1918

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Lappinen v. Union Ore Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1947
  2. Aleckson v. Kennedy Motor Sales Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1952
  3. Prendergast v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1940
  4. Skelly Oil Co. v. GaugenbaughNebraska Supreme Court · 1930
  5. Rice v. Keystone View Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1941

10 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