Appellants contend that the board should have accepted certain medical testimony — which they erroneously describe as the only medical proof respecting liability after October 10, 1959 — that as of the latter date claimant had reverted to the status antedating the second accident; but this testimony contained substantial contradictions, the witness at one point attributing permanent disability to the first accident and at another indicating that the effects...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
