Alexander v. Davol Rubber Co.

Superior Court of Rhode Island

Alexander v. Davol Rubber Co.

1 Super. Ct. (R.I.) 14

CourtSuperior Court of Rhode Island

DecidedNovember 27, 1917

DocketPet. No. 167

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Super. Ct. (R.I.) 14 (Alexander v. Davol Rubber Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Alexander v. Davol Rubber Co., 1 Super. Ct. (R.I.) 14 (R.I. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

TANNER, P. J.

We are of the opinion that the plaintiff has not proven that he was injured through an accident. We think it more reasonable that his trouble was the result of occupation disease. We think the neuritis from which he suffers is the result of the continuous pressure required in the occupation he was following rather than of any sudden twisting which he- describes.

The petition must therefore be denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

TANNER, P. J.

We are of the opinion that the plaintiff has not proven that he was injured through an accident. We think it more reasonable that his trouble was the result of occupation disease. We think the neuritis from which he suffers is the result of the continuous pressure required in the occupation he was following rather than of any sudden twisting which he- describes.

The petition must therefore be denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Super. Ct. (R.I.) 14, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alexander-v-davol-rubber-co-risuperct-1917.