Ambrose v. Coxe Bros. & Co.

109 A. 642, 266 Pa. 536, 1920 Pa. LEXIS 607
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedMarch 8, 1920
DocketAppeal, No. 14
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 109 A. 642 (Ambrose v. Coxe Bros. & Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ambrose v. Coxe Bros. & Co., 109 A. 642, 266 Pa. 536, 1920 Pa. LEXIS 607 (Pa. 1920).

Opinion

Per Curiam,

On appeal from an award by a referee of compensation to the appellee for the death of her husband, the compensation board, in a hearing de novo, found as a fact that his death had been hastened by injuries which he sustained in 1916, while in the employ of the appellant. On appeal to the court below and here the complaint of the appellant is that the evidence did not justify that finding. It is sufficient to say that the evidence is not before us, and the finding of the board under the statute is conclusive: Poluskiewicz v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Company, 257 Pa. 305.

Appeal dismissed and award affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Callihan v. Montgomery
115 A. 889 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1922)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
109 A. 642, 266 Pa. 536, 1920 Pa. LEXIS 607, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ambrose-v-coxe-bros-co-pa-1920.