Summary

Portrait of William O. Douglas William O. Douglas Sancho v. Texas Company — Opinion of the Court

In concluding that under § 9 an uninsured employer could have an award of the Commission reviewed, including the issue of whether or not he was insured, the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico did not take a patently absurd position. The most that can be said is that the contrary position is a tenable one. In holding that the amendments substituted collection by the petitioner for collection by the Attorney General even in case of pending claims, that tribunal did not commit manifest error. The conclusion that the latter procedure survived the amendments is merely another possible view.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of William O. Douglas William O. Douglas Sancho v. Texas Company — Opinion of the Court

Justice Holmes observed:↑ The Supreme Court of Puerto Rico also held that § 243 of the Code of Civil Procedure, barring execution of a judgment for the payment of money after five years from the date of its entry, does not apply to orders of the Commission covering compensation awards, a construction which does not seem to be manifest error.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature