Legal Opinion

Plankinton v. Schurr

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 21, 1958No. Appeal, No. 333PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Hirt, J.,

The claimant, a carpenter, was injured when he fell from a ladder in the house of the defendants, then in the course of construction. The referee denied compensation, under §104 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act as amended June 21, 1939, P. L. 520, 77 PS §22, on the ground that claimant’s employment was casual and not in the regular course of the business of the defendant Raymond C. Schurr. The board reversed and on the finding that claimant was an employe of the defendants, awarded compensation. The lower court affirmed, on its conclusion that the claimant’s employment was…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Blake v. WilsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
  2. Cochrane v. William Penn HotelSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
  3. Thomas v. BacheSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  4. Potash v. BonaccursoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
  5. Fedak v. DzialdowskiSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1934

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Dews v. SHMUKLERSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1962
  2. Arraiza Iglesia v. Comisión IndustrialSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1962
  3. T. Hogan Corp. v. Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
  4. Industrial Valley Bank & Trust Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  5. Iglesia v. Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1962

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API