The real controversy in this case is whether the insurance carrier in 1958 or the appellant carrier which assumed the risk in 1959 is liable for the award. There is no controversy over the right of the claimant to death benefits. The evidence adduced showed that the rupture became progressively larger as time went on. There was medical testimony that the rupture could be considered as of a slowly developing nature and caused by decedent's work. There is no direct testimony...
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.
