Commercial Casualty Insurance v. Crosby
This text of 162 S.E. 922 (Commercial Casualty Insurance v. Crosby) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
A claim for compensation under the workmen’s compensation act was held by George H. Crosby with the industrial commission of Georgia, on account of disability due to a hernia, which he claimed was the result of an accident occurring in the course of his employment by Ford Farms, for which the Commercial Casualty Company was insurer. An award of compensation in favor of claimant, upon an appeal by the plaintiffs in error, was affirmed by the superior court of Chatham county. Error in the judgment of [789]*789the superior court is assigned. The grounds oí error set out in the bill of exceptions do not seem to call for .extended discussion. It is evident that both the industrial commission and the learned judge of the superior court of Chatham county considered the evidence as sufficient to support a finding that the claimant was injured and that his injury was the result of accident. Our examination of the record discloses no reversible error. Horn v. Planters Products Co., 40 Ga. App. 787 (151 S. E. 552); South v. Indemnity Ins. Co. of N. A., 41 Ga. App. 827 (155 S. E. 48).
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
162 S.E. 922, 44 Ga. App. 788, 1932 Ga. App. LEXIS 511, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commercial-casualty-insurance-v-crosby-gactapp-1932.