Legal Opinion

Dunnigan v. Clinton Falls Nursery Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided April 27, 1923No. 23,335PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Taylor, C.

Certiorari to review an award of the industrial commission under the Workmen’s Compensation Law, repealed and superseded by chapter 8,2, p. 90, Laws 1921.

On the afternoon of May 11, 1922, the claimant, Michael Dunni-gan, an employe of the defendant nursery company, was at work in .an open field with a team and common harrow. A man named Frank Harlicher was operating a steel tractor in the same field and was 10 or 12 rods from Dunnigan at the time of the accident. Clouds were gathering in the southwest, but it had not begun to rain. Without any premonitory signs there was a flash of…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Peoples Coal & Ice Co. v. District CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
  2. Central Illinois Public Service Co. v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1920
  3. State ex rel. Niessen v. District Court of Ramsey CountySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1919
  4. State ex rel. Rau v. District CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1917
  5. Reid v. Automatic Electric Washer Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1920

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Caswell's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1940
  2. Walker v. Minnesota Steel Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
  3. American Fuel & Clay Products Co. v. GilbertSupreme Court of Alabama · 1930
  4. Ginn v. Forest Nursery Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1932
  5. Baker v. State Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1929

7 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