Lantz v. Central Pa. Conf. of M. E. Church

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Lantz v. Central Pa. Conf. of M. E. Church

159 A. 57, 104 Pa. Super. 35, 1932 Pa. Super. LEXIS 308

CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedOctober 20, 1931

DocketAppeal 10

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 159 A. 57 (Lantz v. Central Pa. Conf. of M. E. Church) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lantz v. Central Pa. Conf. of M. E. Church, 159 A. 57, 104 Pa. Super. 35, 1932 Pa. Super. LEXIS 308 (Pa. Ct. App. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Trexler, P. J.,

This is a claim for compensation, presented by the widow of Reverend John Max Lantz, whose death occurred on December 31, 1929. It is alleged that the decedent sustained injury from the accident occurring on December 13, 1920, by a fall on the ice in front of the parsonagei in which he resided, striking his right knee and resulting in death from blood poisoning eighteen days thereafter. •

The referee and the Workmen’s Compensation Board decided that the claimant was entitled to compensation and the court below took the same view.

The questions submitted are: (1) whether there was *37 sufficient evidence to warrant a finding by tbe referee in favor of the claimant; and (2) was there causal connection shown between the accident and the death?

The widow of the decedent testified without objection that on Friday, December 13th, her husband was about leaving their home on an errand pertaining to putting church announcements in the local newspaper, but instead of going away as he intended, his wife heard him come back, go into the cellar, get some ashes and put them on the pavement and at that time he stated to her, “I had a very bad fall, and I was trying to make the pavement safe, so nobody would go down like I did.” It is true that no witnesses saw the accident, but the declarations made by decedent to his wife were part of the res gestae. “Statements by a person on going downstairs, as to what had just occurred upstairs, or on entering a house as to what had just occurred outside, would be part of the res gestae. In either case the declaration would be an undesigned incident of the occurrence and not the recital of a past event: see Eby v. Travelers Ins. Co., 258 Pa. 525, 532; Smith v. Stoner, 243 Pa. 57; ” Guyer v. Equitable Gas Co., 279 Pa. 5. This, in connection with the other testimony' submitted, furnished a sufficient basis for the award in favor of the claimant.

As to the causal connection between the accident and the death, we have the testimony of two doctors who stated positively that the injury to the knee caused the death.

These facts appearing, we deem an extended review of the testimony unnecessary. We are all of the opinion that there was sufficient evidence produced to support the finding.

The assignments of error are overruled and the judgment is affirmed.

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

Opinion by

Trexler, P. J.,

This is a claim for compensation, presented by the widow of Reverend John Max Lantz, whose death occurred on December 31, 1929. It is alleged that the decedent sustained injury from the accident occurring on December 13, 1920, by a fall on the ice in front of the parsonagei in which he resided, striking his right knee and resulting in death from blood poisoning eighteen days thereafter. •

The referee and the Workmen’s Compensation Board decided that the claimant was entitled to compensation and the court below took the same view.

The questions submitted are: (1) whether there was *37 sufficient evidence to warrant a finding by tbe referee in favor of the claimant; and (2) was there causal connection shown between the accident and the death?

The widow of the decedent testified without objection that on Friday, December 13th, her husband was about leaving their home on an errand pertaining to putting church announcements in the local newspaper, but instead of going away as he intended, his wife heard him come back, go into the cellar, get some ashes and put them on the pavement and at that time he stated to her, “I had a very bad fall, and I was trying to make the pavement safe, so nobody would go down like I did.” It is true that no witnesses saw the accident, but the declarations made by decedent to his wife were part of the res gestae. “Statements by a person on going downstairs, as to what had just occurred upstairs, or on entering a house as to what had just occurred outside, would be part of the res gestae. In either case the declaration would be an undesigned incident of the occurrence and not the recital of a past event: see Eby v. Travelers Ins. Co., 258 Pa. 525, 532; Smith v. Stoner, 243 Pa. 57; ” Guyer v. Equitable Gas Co., 279 Pa. 5. This, in connection with the other testimony' submitted, furnished a sufficient basis for the award in favor of the claimant.

As to the causal connection between the accident and the death, we have the testimony of two doctors who stated positively that the injury to the knee caused the death.

These facts appearing, we deem an extended review of the testimony unnecessary. We are all of the opinion that there was sufficient evidence produced to support the finding.

The assignments of error are overruled and the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

159 A. 57, 104 Pa. Super. 35, 1932 Pa. Super. LEXIS 308, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lantz-v-central-pa-conf-of-m-e-church-pasuperct-1931.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack