L. W. Limbaugh Mining & Constr. Co. v. Youngblood.

On original submission of this case, this court held (assuming arguendo that Dr. Meyer was the employer’s agent) that the statements made by Dr. Meyer were not fraudulent nor did they constitute an estop-pel so as to toll the one year statute of limitations. The supreme court reversed and held that a non-fraudulent representation by the employer’s representative which unintentionally misled an employee to delay the filing of a workmen’s compensation claim may toll the limitations period set out in § 25-5-80, Code 1975.

In its opinion the supreme court said: Whether the employer or the carrier,…