Smith v. John T. Ragan & Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Smith v. John T. Ragan & Co.

160 S.E. 538, 44 Ga. App. 111, 1931 Ga. App. LEXIS 601

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 17, 1931

Docket21594

StatusPublished

This text of 160 S.E. 538 (Smith v. John T. Ragan & Co.) 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.

Bluebook

Smith v. John T. Ragan & Co., 160 S.E. 538, 44 Ga. App. 111, 1931 Ga. App. LEXIS 601 (Ga. Ct. App. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

1. This was a claim for compensation under the workmen’s compensation act. Upon the hearing before commissioner Whitaker, the evidence, with the legal inferences arising therefrom, authorized the findings of the commissioner that the injury of the claimant was caused by an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment, and that he had given his employer timely notice of the accident.

2. The above-stated ruling disposes of the only contested issues in the case, and the judge of the superior court erred in reversing the judgment of the commissioner and in setting aside his findings as to the facts.

Judgment reversed.

Lulce, J., concurs. Bloodioorth, J., absent on account of illness.

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

Broyles, C. J.

1. This was a claim for compensation under the workmen’s compensation act. Upon the hearing before commissioner Whitaker, the evidence, with the legal inferences arising therefrom, authorized the findings of the commissioner that the injury of the claimant was caused by an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment, and that he had given his employer timely notice of the accident.

2. The above-stated ruling disposes of the only contested issues in the case, and the judge of the superior court erred in reversing the judgment of the commissioner and in setting aside his findings as to the facts.

Judgment reversed.

Lulce, J., concurs. Bloodioorth, J., absent on account of illness.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

160 S.E. 538, 44 Ga. App. 111, 1931 Ga. App. LEXIS 601, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-john-t-ragan-co-gactapp-1931.