Onofrey v. Susquehanna Collieries Co.

117 A. 778, 274 Pa. 173, 1922 Pa. LEXIS 662
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided May 8, 1922·No. Appeal, No. 399·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

Plaintiff claimed compensation for the death of her husband, Stephen Onofrey, who worked as a miner in the colliery of defendant. The only evidence to show that the injury, which is alleged to have caused the death, occurred during the course of Onofrey’s employment, or on the premises of defendant, was testimony by claimant to the effect that on a certain night her husband left his house at nine o’clock and returned between eleven and twelve o’clock, when "he said he fell in the mines and complained of his head.” On this meagre bit of proof the [175] compensation authorities very properly declined to find the required basic fact that Onofrey died from an injury received in the course of his employment, and the court below correctly approved their decision.

We see no error; the judgment is affirmed.

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

Onofrey v. Susquehanna Collieries Co., 117 A. 778, 274 Pa. 173, 1922 Pa. LEXIS 662 (Pa. 1922).

117 A. 778 (Onofrey v. Susquehanna Collieries Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

McMahon v. Edw. G. Budd Mfg. Co.
164 A. 850 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1932)
Smith v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Co.
130 A. 265 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1925)
Gordon v. Bamford Milling Co.
86 Pa. Super. 324 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1925)
Kelly v. American Stores Co.
2 Pa. D. & C. 697 (Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, 1923)