Siglin v. Armour & Co.
103 A. 991, 261 Pa. 30, 1918 Pa. LEXIS 682
Opinion
When the husband and father of the appellees was jolted from the truck of the. appellant, he was in the course of his employment with it. How he happened to be sitting where he was at the time he was jolted from the truck is utterly immaterial, and the judgment is affirmed on the opinion of the learned court below sustaining the action of the referee and the compensation board.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Siglin v. Armour & Co., 103 A. 991, 261 Pa. 30, 1918 Pa. LEXIS 682 (Pa. 1918).
103 A. 991 (Siglin v. Armour & Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Smith v. Husky Terminal Restr., Inc.
762 P.2d 1193 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1988)
Ginther v. J. P. Graham Transfer Co.
27 A.2d 712 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1942)
Delbene v. Pine
19 A.2d 533 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1941)
Boyd v. Philmont Country Club
195 A. 156 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1937)
Menendes v. Dravo Construction Co.
167 A. 423 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1933)
Granville v. Scranton Coal Co.
76 Pa. Super. 335 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1921)
Blouss v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western R. R.
73 Pa. Super. 95 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1919)