COMPENSATION CASES ANNOTATED THE WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION, EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY THE STATES AND TERRITORIES AND THE ENGLISH AND c+ TABLE OF CASES [In addition to the cases reported at length in this volume are numerous annotations which appear in the footnotes. These annotations consist of abstracts of cases giving statement of facts and excerpts from opinions. Cases appearing in the notes are designated by the letter n preceding the number of the page on which the same appear in this volume, as, for instance: Adams v. Hines, Wash. 196 Pac. 19.. n28] A -Wash. -, 196 Pac. 19.. Adams v. Hines.. Adams v. New York, N. H. & H. R. Co..199 Mass. 476, 85 N. E. 585. Akin v. Madison County. Cal. App., 186 Pac. 398..... Co. Alexander v. Great Northern R. Co. Allen v. Holler.. 105 Wash. 346, 177 Pac. 786... 5 Ohio App. 284... Allen v. Smith..... Commission American Ice Co. v. Porreca..... 213 Mass. 573, 100 N. E. 1007.... - iii Anderson v. Bauer. Anderson v. Boston El. R. Co. Anderson v. Director General of Rail roads N. J. L. - Anderson v. Kansas City Rys. Co...... 200 Pac. 889... n28 n589 223 n490 n100 n763 n162 n73 n611 n854 n273 n974 n292 n215 n928 n643 n939 n928 n741 n407 n845 n5 n724 n476 n849 n584 n412 Anderson v. Puget Sound Traction, Light & Power Co.. .89 Wash. 83, 154 Pac. 135...... Anderson v. St. Louis & S. F. R. Co.... (Mo. App.), 184 S. W. 481.... Arens v. Baltimore & O. C. Terminal R. Co. 213 Ill. App. 273. Arkansas Cent. R. Co. v. Janson... .90 Ark. 494, 119 S. W. 648.... Armitage v. Chicago, M. & St. P. R. Co..54 Mont. 38, 166 Pac. 301. .85 Ore. 333, 166 Pac. 29. Askay v. Maloney... Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Sun 4 Ga. App. 113, 60 S. E. 1075... ད .... Augusta Ry. & Elec. Co. v. Lyle..... B Okla. - 200 Pac. 174....... Okla. -" -; Badie v. Columbia Brewing Co..... 142 La. 853, 77 So. 768.... Iowa - 186 N. W. 665... 10 Ala. App. 329, 65 So. 416. Ballanger v. Shumate. Baltimore Dry Docks & Shipbuilding Co. v. Webster.... Baltimore & O. C. Terminal R. Co. v. Becker Milling Mach. Co..... Baltimore & O. R. Co. v. Mangus... Baltimore & O. R. Co. v. Taylor... Md. 116 Atl. 842...... 272 Fed. 933..... Ind. App. - 126 N. E. 863. 186 Fed. 828. ... n448 n615 n762 n133 n603 n248 n773 n225 n899 n875 n653 n667 n493 n227 n496 n601 n484 n510 n778 n45 n842 n235 n220 n751 n406 n937 n770 n34 n9 n841 n246 n89 n636 n489 n806 n583 Bannigan v. Woodbury. Baltimore & O. R. Co. v. White........176 Fed. 900... (Tex. Civ. App.), 229 S. W. 588... Co..123 Minn. 153, 143 N. W. 263.. Barnett v. Levy..... Barnett v. Minneapolis & St. L. R. Barton v. Craighill.... Barton V. Studebaker Corporation Bauer v. Griess.... America Basel v. Ansonia Clock Co.... Cal. App. - N. Y. App. Div. Neb. -, 181 N. W. 156.. Beach v. Gendler... Beall v. Kansas City Rys. Co.. .108 Kan. 761, 197 Pac. 205.. of Bergeron v. Texas & P. R. Co... n524 n682 n798 n271 208 S. W. 935.. n74 (Mo. App.), 228 S. W. 834.. Bell v. Procter & Gamble Mfg. Co......152 N. Y. App. Div. 434, 137 N. Y. Bender v. Dazian.... facturing Co.... Bennett v. Page Bros.. .55 Wash. 579, 105 Pac. 145. . . . . . Berry v. Atlantic Ry..... Berry v. M. F. Donovan & Sons. Biggs v. Peoria & P. U. Ry. Co... ...... n117 n29 n809 n810 n613 n912 n68 n901 n310 n44 n179 n485 n963 n693 n51 n915 n597 Md. -- " 115 Atl. 59... 182 Ill. App. 613.... .178 N. C. 481, 100 S. E. 891...... n640 n41 n852 n431 Benoit v. Boston & N. St. R. Co........216 Mass. 320, 103 N. E. 830.... n828 Benton v. Regeser. Berg v. Michell... .20 Ariz. 273, 179 Pac. 966...... n248 .196 Ill. App. 509.. n960 .144 La. 225, 80 So. 262. n786 n966 Cal. App. - n130 n865 n545 n940 n754 n933 n425 n580 n266 .2 Ala. App. 649, 57 So. 50...... n455 |