Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Board of Commissioners of Henry County v. Dudley

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided January 29, 1976No. 2-774A164Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Concurring and Dissenting Opinion

White, J.,

— The only issues of fact before the board were whether (1) plaintiff’s appellee Dudley was intoxicated at the time of his injury and, if so, (2) whether his injury was due to such intoxication. Ind. Ann. Stat. § 22-3-2-8 (Burns Code Ed., 1974) provides that if the defendant sustains the burden of proving the affirmative of both these issues no compensation shall be allowed.

The Industrial Board made no findings of fact, either general or special, on those issues. It merely recited the evidence relevant thereto. It thus failed to execute the mandate…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Newman v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1975
  2. McKee v. Mutual Life Ins. Co. of New YorkIndiana Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Wright v. Peabody Coal Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1948
  4. Cole v. Sheehan Construction CompanyIndiana Supreme Court · 1944
  5. Transport Motor Express, Inc. v. SmithIndiana Court of Appeals · 1972

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