Krapf v. Arthur
This text of 146 A. 894 (Krapf v. Arthur) 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.
Opinion
Plaintiff, injured while traveling on a trolley car, received an award from the Workmen’s Compensation authorities, which on appeal was reversed by the court of common pleas. He appealed to the Superior Court, and that tribunal reinstated the award. Defendants have appealed to this court. The facts of the case are detailed in the opinion of the Superior Court (see Krapf v. Arthur, 95 Pa. Superior Ct. 468) and need not be repeated here. It is enough to say that we agree with the ultimate conclusion there stated, that plaintiff, who had been sent on a business trip, had not completed his mission at the time of the accident; when injured he was on the way to his employer’s office, traveling at the latter’s expense, to report the result of his work.
The judgment is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
146 A. 894, 297 Pa. 304, 1929 Pa. LEXIS 411, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/krapf-v-arthur-pa-1929.