Gilmore v. Ind. Comm.

4 Ohio Law. Abs. 486
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided June 10, 1926·No. No. 19885·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Katherine Gilmore filed an application for compensation with the Industrial Commission which was denied.

It appears that Gilmore was the principal of a grade school in the city of Toledo and tha+ on Friday afternoon she was driving home from the school in an automobile and whim so doing sustained bodily injuries by reason of a collision of a street car.

• The Common Pleas rendered judgment on a verdict for the Commission, which judgment was affirmed by the Court of Appeals.

Gilmore in the Supreme Court contends:

1. That she was acting in the scope of her employment at the time of her injury.

2. That the verdict was against the weight of the evidence.

3. That one of the nine jurymen signing the verdict was asleep during a portion of the trial.

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

Gilmore v. Ind. Comm., 4 Ohio Law. Abs. 486 (Ohio 1926).

4 Ohio Law. Abs. 486 (Gilmore v. Ind. Comm.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Nagy v. Kangesser
168 N.E. 517 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1928)