Powell v. Sonntag
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Arnold, J.,
In this workmen’s compensation case the sole question is whether the board abused its discretion in refusing rehearing to the defendant. That discretion is statutorily vested in it, and not in the courts. The defendant took an appeal from the board’s .refusal to the court of common pleas. The board’s discretion is not subject to review except if its discretion be abused: Barton v. Pittsburgh Coal Co., 113 Pa. Superior Ct. 454, 173 A. 678. When the appeal reached the common pleas, therefore, the court below could not substitute its discretion for that of the board.
The…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Nixon v. NixonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
- Fedak v. DzialdowskiSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
- Barton v. Pittsburgh Coal Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
- Boyd v. Philmont Country ClubSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
- Gliwa v. United States Steel Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
3Cited by19 opinions
- Riley Stoker Corp. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
- Yeager v. United Natural Gas Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
- Fetzer v. MichrinaCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
- Gosek v. Garmer and Stiles CompanySupreme Court of Iowa · 1968
- Douglas v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.