Legal Opinion
Ohmen v. Adams Brothers
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided July 10, 1929PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, C. J.
The appeal is predicated upon the alleged error of the trial court in holding that the injury to the plaintiff arose out of and in the course of his employment with the defendants, Adams Brothers. The General Assembly, in Chapter 307 of the Public Acts of 1927, in an amendment to the Compensation Act, re-enacted in substance the fundamental provision of this Act, that compensation can only be awarded for personal injury sustained by an employee arising out of and in the course of his employment or on account of death resulting from personal injury so sustained. We had in a series of decisions…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Larke v. John Hancock Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1916
- Mann v. Glastonbury Knitting Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1916
- Marchiatello v. Lynch Realty Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1919
- Whitney v. Hazard Lead WorksSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
- Corvi v. Stiles & Reynolds Brick Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1925
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Voehl v. Indemnity Insurance Co. of North AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Smith v. Seamless Rubber Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1930
- Reisinger-Siehler Co. v. PerryCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1933
- Western Pipe & Steel Co. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
- Mascika v. Connecticut Tool & Engineering Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1929
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.