Ind. Comm. v. Henry

Ohio Court of Appeals

Ind. Comm. v. Henry

10 Ohio Law. Abs. 393, 1931 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1331

CourtOhio Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 12, 1931

DocketNo. 294

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 10 Ohio Law. Abs. 393 (Ind. Comm. v. Henry) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ind. Comm. v. Henry, 10 Ohio Law. Abs. 393, 1931 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1331 (Ohio Ct. App. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

FER CURIAM

Upon a consideration of the entire record we have arrived at the conclusion that the record shows .facts which warranted the jury in finding that the injuries which resulted in the death of Harry Henry were received by him in the course of and arose out of his said employment with the said The Purity Ice Cream and Dairy Company for the reason that at the time of the accident the deceased was traveling the most direct route to get his horse which was the next necessary act in the course of his employment.

We are also of opinion that the record discloses such facts as would bring the case within the reasoning of the decision of tlie Supreme Court of Ohio in the case of Industrial Commission of Ohio v Barber, reported in 117 Oh St page 373. We think the record discloses that Harry Henry at the time of the accident was fairly within the zone of his employment.

Finding no error in the record which we consider prejudicial to plaintiff in error, the judgment of the lower court will be affirmed.

AT.TJR.EAn. PJ, HORNBECK and KUNKLE, JJ, concur.

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

FER CURIAM

Upon a consideration of the entire record we have arrived at the conclusion that the record shows .facts which warranted the jury in finding that the injuries which resulted in the death of Harry Henry were received by him in the course of and arose out of his said employment with the said The Purity Ice Cream and Dairy Company for the reason that at the time of the accident the deceased was traveling the most direct route to get his horse which was the next necessary act in the course of his employment.

We are also of opinion that the record discloses such facts as would bring the case within the reasoning of the decision of tlie Supreme Court of Ohio in the case of Industrial Commission of Ohio v Barber, reported in 117 Oh St page 373. We think the record discloses that Harry Henry at the time of the accident was fairly within the zone of his employment.

Finding no error in the record which we consider prejudicial to plaintiff in error, the judgment of the lower court will be affirmed.

AT.TJR.EAn. PJ, HORNBECK and KUNKLE, JJ, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

10 Ohio Law. Abs. 393, 1931 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1331, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ind-comm-v-henry-ohioctapp-1931.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack