Harper v. State

Unknown CourtOctober 15, 1901Cited 3 times

Defendant WinGeorge Bennett and Charles Warner

Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s): Cali, Ioon
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling: Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached: appeal
State: Nebraska

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Wrongful Termination

Outcome

Plaintiff's workers' compensation claim was dismissed as time-barred because he failed to file within one year of the accident as required by the workmen's compensation act. The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal.

Excerpt

From: the circuit court of Chickasaw county. Horn EugeNe 0. Sykes, Judge. Appellant and her husband, Leroy Harper, were jointly indicted on the charge of murdering one A. B. Bichardson. A severance was had, and appellant was tried and convicted of manslaughter. Appellant and her husband were employed to work on the farm of deceased, and were absent from their work on the day before the difficulty occurred which resulted in the death of deceased. On the day the difficulty occurred deceased went to the house of appellant and her husband to find out why they had been absent from their work, and while there a difficulty arose between the parties, in which Leroy cut deceased with a knife, and appellant struck him a severe blow with a club, from 'which injuries he died. Appellant was convicted aud sentenced to the penitentiary. From this judgment she appealed to the supreme court. The opinion of the court contains a further statement of the facts.

What This Ruling Means

# Harper v. State - Court Ruling Summary **What Happened** A woman named Harper and her husband worked on a farm. They were absent from work one day, and a serious incident occurred involving the farm owner that resulted in a death. Harper was charged with manslaughter in connection with this incident. She also filed a claim seeking compensation for a work-related injury or loss. **What the Court Decided** The court ruled against Harper. The judge dismissed her compensation claim because she waited too long to file it. Under state law at the time, workers had only one year from the date of injury to file their claim. Since Harper missed this deadline, the court would not hear her case, regardless of whether her claim had merit. **Why This Matters for Workers** This case illustrates an important rule that remains relevant today: workers' compensation claims have strict filing deadlines. If you're injured at work or believe your employer owes you money, you must act quickly. Missing the deadline—even by one day—can mean losing your right to compensation entirely. Workers should report injuries and file claims immediately rather than waiting.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse more:Wrongful Termination cases

Similar Rulings

Con Ed v. NLRB

U.S. Supreme CourtDec 1938

Mixed Result

Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board

U.S. Supreme CourtFeb 1951

Republic Aviation Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board

U.S. Supreme CourtApr 1945

Plaintiff Win

Mastro Plastics Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board

U.S. Supreme CourtJun 1956

Plaintiff Win

Read Full Opinion More George Bennett and Charles Warner Rulings All Rulings

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

Check My Rights Learn the Basics

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.