Legal Opinion · Dissent

Mid-Continent Petroleum Corporation v. Harris

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided March 14, 1955No. 35939Published

1DissentArnold, Justice

The majority opinion rei-iterates the “departmental rule” and attempts to apply it to the facts in this case.

The evidence shows that claimant at the time he was injured was hauling gasoline from the refinery of respondents to a plant in Fayetteville, Arkansas. The delivery of the finished product . of respondent’s refinery to a point where such finished products can- be distributed and sold, in the course of business is an incidental part of the refinery. See Pemberton Bakery v. State Industrial Commission, 180 Okl. 446, 70 P.2d 98; H. J. Heinz Co. v, Wood, 181 Okl. 389, 74 P.2d 353; State…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Pemberton Bakery v. State Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1937
  2. Ice v. GardnerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1938
  3. H. J. Heinz Co. v. WoodSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1937
  4. Oklahoma Natural Gas Co. v. NickensSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1948
  5. State Highway Dept. v. AllentharpSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1947

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API