Legal Opinion
Shober v. Industrial Commission
Utah Supreme Court
Decided May 25, 1937No. 5879PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LARSON, Justice.
Certiorari to the Industrial Commission. The only question presented is: Are services rendered by a chiropractor within the term of “medical services,” as that term is used in the Workmen’s Compensation Act? Plaintiff, an employee of the State Road Commission, while assisting to lift a gravel spreader onto a truck, strained, wrenched, or hurt his back. It caused him considerable pain, and for three days he was off work. He was given eight chiropractic treatments by Carl 0. Larson, a duly licensed chiropractor, who adjusted or manipulated the vertebrae in the lower cervical and…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Union Iron Works v. Industrial Accident CommisionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
- Board of Medical Examiners v. FreenorUtah Supreme Court · 1916
- State v. EricksonUtah Supreme Court · 1916
3Cited by5 opinions
- Neagle v. State Highway DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1963
- Ingebritson v. TJERNLUND MANUFACTURING COMPANYSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1971
- State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. GreggMississippi Supreme Court · 1988
- Green v. RawlingsMichigan Supreme Court · 1939
- Travelers Ins. v. DicksonCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1947