Legal Opinion

Mollerup Van Lines v. Adams

Utah Supreme Court

Decided February 8, 1965No. 10101PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CROCKETT, Justice:

Mollerup Van Lines and its insurer, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, seek reversal of a supplemental order in favor of Tyven Adams for workmen’s compensation and surgery for his injured back.

It is not disputed that the applicant Adams suffered an accidental injury while working for Mollerup. In attempting to lift a truck wheel on to its axle, he slipped and something “popped” in his back, causing him to fall to the ground. Subsequently, upon a hearing before the Commission, and on the basis of the report of a medical advisory board, he was given a lump sum payment of…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Kent v. Industrial CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1936
  2. Salt Lake City v. Industrial CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1923
  3. Kaltenheuser v. SeskerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1963
  4. Gillick v. Fruin-Colnon Construction Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1933
  5. Spencer v. Industrial CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1955

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Virgin v. BD. OF REVIEW OF INDUS. COM'NCourt of Appeals of Utah · 1990
  2. Johnston v. Labor CommissionCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2013
  3. Rushton v. Gelco ExpressUtah Supreme Court · 1986
  4. Spencer v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N OF STATE OF UTAHUtah Supreme Court · 1987
  5. Di Giorgia Corp. v. Industrial CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1978

1 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