McLaughlin's Case

155 N.E. 927, 259 Mass. 25, 1927 Mass. LEXIS 1155
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided March 14, 1927·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

By the Court.

There was evidence tending to show that the employee, while engaged in the course of his employment for the subscriber, was carrying and distributing radiators throughout different parts of a building preparatory to their [26] being set up. While engaged in this work, he felt a soreness in his knee and got a strain. The knee within a day or two became lame and swollen. The finding of the board, to the 'effect that the employee received “a strain and wrench in the course of this heavy lifting,” cannot be pronounced without : support in the evidence. The inference that the inj ury arose out of the employment cannot be pronounced conjectural or speculative. McNicol’s Case, 215 Mass. 497, 499. Sponatski’s Case, 220 Mass. 526, 528. Madden’s Case, 222 Mass. 487. The case is governed by Mills’s Case, 258 Mass. 475.

Decree affirmed.

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

McLaughlin's Case, 155 N.E. 927, 259 Mass. 25, 1927 Mass. LEXIS 1155 (Mass. 1927).

155 N.E. 927 (McLaughlin's Case) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Long's Case
150 N.E.2d 282 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1958)
Wheaton's Case
38 N.E.2d 617 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1941)
Chmielowski's Case
17 N.E.2d 165 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1938)
Crowley's Case
191 N.E. 668 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1934)
Harrington's Case
188 N.E. 499 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1933)
Jarvis's Case
174 N.E. 484 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1931)