Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

201 Tenn. 655

Adams v. Patterson

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided April 1, 1957

Tennessee Supreme Court · decided 1957-04-01

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently October 2003

14 state decisions

Relies on Atlas Powder Company v. Leister · 2 Smith & H. 132 - Mullins v. Tennessee Stave & Lumber Co. · 10 Smith & H. 206 - Bailey v. American Glanzstoff Corp.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1957-04-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Mr. Justice Buknett

¶1delivered the opinion of the Court.

¶2This is a proceeding to enforce payment of compensation under the'Workmen’s'Compensation Láw, Section 50-901 et seq., T.C.'A. The present action is based specifically on Section 50-1007, T.C.A. The trial judge allowed compensation but this was not satisfactory to the employee and he has appealed. '

¶3The récord contains no''ñiótion for a new-trial. "There is no error in the technical "record. The employer moves to dismiss for this reason. In this state of the record, this Court is without jurisdiction to consider the propositions of fact here raised. Mullins v. Tennessee Stave & Lumber Co., 155 Tenn. 132, 290 S.W. 975; Bailey v. American Glanzstoff Corp., 163 Tenn. 206, 42 S.W.2d 347; Rule 14, 185 Tenn. 866; Atlas Powder Co. v. Leister, 197 Tenn. 491, 274 S.W.2d 364.

¶4For this reason the appeal must be dismissed at the cost of the plaintiff: in error, employee.

/201/tenn/655 · .json · Public domain