Sarja v. Pittsburgh Steel Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the CourtHolt, J.
Plaintiff, through appellants his attorneys, instituted a proceeding in the district court for compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act against the Pittsburgh Steel Ore Company, his employer.’ Issue was joined, but before trial a settlement was effected, pursuant to which judgment for $1,800 against the employer was entered. This was paid, and appellants, claiming that plaintiff, the respondent, had agreed to pay them one-half of the recovery for their services, retained $900. Thereafter the court, on plaintiff’s petition and a hearing, made an order requiring the appellants to…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State ex rel. London & Lancashire Indemnity Co. v. District CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1918
- Klampe v. KlampeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1917
- May v. Charles Hoertz & SonMichigan Supreme Court · 1919
- Landro v. Great Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
- State v. CareySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- MacK v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
- Buckler v. HiltIndiana Supreme Court · 1936
- Fidelity Union Casualty Co. v. DappermanCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1932
- In Re MauryMontana Supreme Court · 1934
- Adkins v. StakerOhio Supreme Court · 1935
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.