Legal Opinion

Garrison v. Bonfield

New Mexico Supreme Court

Decided August 25, 1953No. 5603PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

McGHEE, Justice.

The appellant filed claim for workmen’s compensation in statutory form for an injury claimed to have been received while working for Bonfield in a retail lumber yard at Hobbs, New Mexico.

The answer denied the claimant suffered an injury arising out of and in the course of his employment while working for the employer, denied claimant suffered any disability, and pleaded by way of new matter:

“1. They deny that the Defendant Joe Bonfield was at the time of the injury complained of engaged in one of the extra hazardous occupations or pursuits set forth in the Workmen’s…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Keeney v. BeasmanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1936
  2. Yeomans v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1941
  3. L. E. Marks Co. v. MooreCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1933
  4. Eaves v. Contract Trucking Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1951
  5. Lester v. Auto Haulaway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1932

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Hogue v. WurdackMissouri Court of Appeals · 1957
  2. Orcutt v. S & L Paint Contractors, Ltd.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1990
  3. Orcutt v. S & L Paint Contractors, Ltd.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1990
  4. Montano v. WilliamsNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1976
  5. Quintana v. Nolan Bros., Inc.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1969

6 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