Swan v. Smith-Faris Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Swan v. Smith-Faris Co.

162 A. 495, 107 Pa. Super. 45, 1932 Pa. Super. LEXIS 128

CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedApril 27, 1932

DocketAppeal 184

StatusPublished

This text of 162 A. 495 (Swan v. Smith-Faris Co.) 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

Swan v. Smith-Faris Co., 162 A. 495, 107 Pa. Super. 45, 1932 Pa. Super. LEXIS 128 (Pa. Ct. App. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Stadteeld, J.,

Workmen’s compensation case. The referee and the board allowed compensation. The lower court, Snee, J., dismissed the appeal of the defendant, and affirmed *46 the award. From that order this appeal is taken by defendant. The claim arises out of substantially the same state of facts as in the case of August and Mary Grerst against the same defendant, at 107 Pa. Superior Ot. 30 of this court, wherein an opinion has this day been handed down. Both decedents were working at the same place, under the same conditions and their deaths resulted apparently under the same circumstances.

For the reasons set forth in the opinion referred to, the assignments of error are overruled and the judgment affirmed.

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

Opinion by

Stadteeld, J.,

Workmen’s compensation case. The referee and the board allowed compensation. The lower court, Snee, J., dismissed the appeal of the defendant, and affirmed *46 the award. From that order this appeal is taken by defendant. The claim arises out of substantially the same state of facts as in the case of August and Mary Grerst against the same defendant, at 107 Pa. Superior Ot. 30 of this court, wherein an opinion has this day been handed down. Both decedents were working at the same place, under the same conditions and their deaths resulted apparently under the same circumstances.

For the reasons set forth in the opinion referred to, the assignments of error are overruled and the judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

162 A. 495, 107 Pa. Super. 45, 1932 Pa. Super. LEXIS 128, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/swan-v-smith-faris-co-pasuperct-1932.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack