LINDSEY ET AL.
v.
ST. PAUL MERCURY INDEMNITY CO.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the jury's verdict was supported by the evidence and that no trial errors occurred.
Plaintiff claimed workers' compensation benefits for a hernia allegedly sustained while working for the defendant at age thirteen. The defendant denie…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Claim For Workmen'S Compensation Benefits cases and more on FLexlaw
STRUM, Circuit Judge.
This appeal is from the judgment of a federal district court in Texas, rejecting appellants’ claim for Workmen’s Compensation benefits under the laws of that state.
Appellant, William Allen Lindsey, alleges that when he was thirteen years old he was employed by Bire-leys Beverage Corporation in San Antonio. While pulling a “dolly” up a ramp, loaded with about seventy cases of bottles, he felt a sharp pain in his right groin which resulted in a hernia, of which injury he alleges he gave timely notice to his employer, Bire-leys, and to the Industrial Accident Board of Texas, but his claim was denied and this suit followed.
Appellee, defendant below, denied the occurrence of any accident and alleged that no notice of any kind was given. The trial court allowed an amendment by the plaintiff alleging a report of the alleged injury to the employer’s foreman, James Herd, the giving of which ap-pellee denied.
The case was submitted to the jury upon special issues, all of which were found in favor of the defendant below, including the issue as to the occurrence of an accidental injury, and notice. The trial court approved the verdict by denying plaintiff a new trial.
The transcript reveals no evidence which would tend to demonstrate that the verdict is wrong, or that there was error of any other nature in the trial. The judgment appealed from is therefore
Affirmed.