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

Superior Court of Pennsylvania·Decided April 27, 1932·No. Appeal 184·Published

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.

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

Pincite

162 A. 495 (Swan v. Smith-Faris Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related