Pillsbury Flour Mills Co. v. McNeill

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Pillsbury Flour Mills Co. v. McNeill

1939 OK 437, 95 P.2d 235, 185 Okla. 574, 1939 Okla. LEXIS 435

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedOctober 24, 1939

DocketNo. 29014.

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 1939 OK 437 (Pillsbury Flour Mills Co. v. McNeill) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Pillsbury Flour Mills Co. v. McNeill, 1939 OK 437, 95 P.2d 235, 185 Okla. 574, 1939 Okla. LEXIS 435 (Okla. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

By this proceeding the petitioner Pillsbury Flour Mills Company, employer, and Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, insurance carrier, seek to review an award of the State Industrial Commission entered November 18, 1938, in favor of George Riley McNeill, respondent, who was claimant in the State Industrial Commission, which award found that respondent was totally temporarily disabled by reason of an accidental injury and ordered payment accordingly.

One of the specifications of error in the petition for review is that the evidence is not sufficient to support the award. On March 28, 1939, respondent filed a confession of error in which it is admitted that the evidence in the record now before us might be insufficient. I-Ie suggests that the cause be remanded to the State Industrial Commission for further proceedings, but such proceeding is not authorized for such purpose.

Under the authority of Harbour-Longmire Co. v. Owrey, 167 Okla. 417, 30 P.2d 163, upon the filing of such confession of error, the award may be vacated.

The award is vacated.

BAYLESS, C. J., WELOI-I, Y. C. J„ and RILEY, OSBORN, CORN, GIBSON, and) HURST, JJ., concur. DAVISON and DAN-NER, .T.T., absent.

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