Court Opinion

ID: 9868823
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-26 18:59:41.809396+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:45:55.847128
License: Public Domain

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING.
We desire to correct an inaccuracy appearing in the original opinion and pointed out in the motion for rehearing. The request made by the Industrial Accident Board to Dr. Jennings for a report on the condition of the employee was made, and the report of Dr. Jennings was returned ■ prior to the making of the contract of- settlement, and not after the contract was *506submitted to the Industrial Accident Board for its approval. This inaccuracy in no sense weakened the contention of the employee that the contract should be set aside for the fraud of the Board or its agent, but we are glad our attention was called to it. The correction makes it all the more certain that Dr. Jennings was not the agent of the Board.
The motion for rehearing has been given due consideration and is overruled.
Opinion adopted by the Supreme Court January 29, 1936.