⚖ SoapBox law
CasesDocketsStatutesRegulationsJudgesLawyersFile a complaintOversightDataLibrary

Cases

Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.

8 opinions for “Danielle L Wiedmaier”

Missouri Court of Appeals · 2007-12-04 · Published · cited 9× · 239 S.W.3d 687; 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 1641; 2007 WL 4233397
239 S.W.3d 687 (2007) BLUE POOL FARMS, LLC, Appellant/Plaintiff, v. Ruth BASLER, Trustee of Revocable Trust of Ruth Basler, Dated May 11, 1998, and Antje Horton, Respondents/Defendants. No. ED 89462. Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two. December 4, 2007. *689 Daniel R. Schramm, Timothy E. Hayes & Assoc.,
Missouri Court of Appeals · 1988-02-23 · Published · cited 0× · 745 S.W.2d 839; 1988 Mo. App. LEXIS 375; 1988 WL 13078
REINHARD, Judge. Employer appeals from a final award allowing compensation of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (the “Commission”), affirming an award of workers’ compensation death benefits to *840claimant. The issue presented is whether there is sufficient evidence to support the Commission’s finding that an employee’s death by heart attack was triggered
Missouri Court of Appeals · 1997-04-01 · Published · cited 9× · 943 S.W.2d 821; 1997 Mo. App. LEXIS 553; 1997 WL 148642
943 S.W.2d 821 (1997) Dixie Boyd CARTER, Respondent, v. JONES TRUCK LINES, INC., Appellant. No. 21275. Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, Division Two. April 1, 1997. Motion for Rehearing and Transfer Denied April 23, 1997. Application to Transfer Denied May 27, 1997. *822 Daniel E. Sc
Arizona Supreme Court · 1993-10-14 · Published · cited 0× · 176 Ariz. 318; 861 P.2d 603; 150 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 7; 1993 Ariz. LEXIS 100
OPINION ZLAKET, Justice. We accepted review to determine whether, and to what extent, termination of post-injury employment for misconduct affects an employee’s right to recover workers’ compensation benefits for loss of earning capacity arising out of the earlier industrial injury. We also briefly address the consequences of an employee’s post-injury return to work at his or her previous place of employm
Missouri Court of Appeals · 1991-03-27 · Published · cited 0× · 809 S.W.2d 102; 1991 Mo. App. LEXIS 458; 1991 WL 41778
MAUS, Presiding Judge. In this proceeding under The Workers’ Compensation Law, the Administrative Law Judge awarded claimant, Burney S. Choate, permanent partial disability of 15 percent of his right elbow, 20 percent of his right shoulder, and 5 percent of the body as a whole based upon a cervical spine injury. He added a multiplicity of injury factor of 10 percent for 97.9 weeks. Upon claimant’s appeal, the Labor & Ind
Arizona Supreme Court · 1993-10-14 · Published · cited 6× · 861 P.2d 603; 176 Ariz. 318
176 Ariz. 318 (1993) 861 P.2d 603 ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, Petitioner Employer, State Compensation Fund, Petitioner Carrier, v. The INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION of Arizona, Respondent, Daniel T. Gibson, Respondent Employee. Randall KINNARD, Petitioner Employee, v. The INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION of Arizona, Respondent, Cyprus Twin Buttes Corporation, Respondent Employer, Cyprus Minerals Company, Respondent Carrier.<
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2008-08-20 · Published · cited 97× · 537 F.3d 1202; 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 17764; 2008 WL 3854977
537 F.3d 1202 (2008) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant, v. Glenn M. GALLANT, Defendant-Appellant/Cross-Appellee. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant, v. Douglas R. Baetz, Defendant-Appellant/Cross-Appellee. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. Thomas Alan Boyd, Defendant-Appellee/Cross-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellan
Michigan Supreme Court · 1951-01-08 · Published · cited 0× · 329 Mich. 287; 45 N.W.2d 370; 1951 Mich. LEXIS 419
Reid, C. J. Leave having been obtained, plaintiff Lysle B. Hunting took an appeal in the nature of' mandamus from a decision of the defendant State board of registration for architects, professional engineers and land surveyors (which board is hereinafter referred to as defendant) denying plaintiff’s petition for registration as an architect without examination. Plaintiff’s petition was filed on March 22,-1938