Legal Opinion

Renovich v. Bethlehem Mines Corp.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 18, 1938No. Appeals, 40 and 41PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Keller, P. J.,

This appeal calls for a construction of section 307 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act of June 2, 1915, P. L. 736, as amended by Act of April 26, 1929, P. L. 829, with special reference to the phrase, “children to whom he stood in loco parentis.”

In listing the persons entitled to compensation in case of the injured employee’s death, the act mentions children under the age of sixteen and says: “The terms ‘child’ and ‘children’ shall include stepchildren and adopted children and children to Avhom he [the deceased employee] stood in loco parentis, if members of decedent’s…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Moritz v. GarnhartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1838
  2. State v. Maryland InstituteCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1898
  3. Commonwealth Ex Rel. v. MilneSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
  4. Robinson's EstateSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
  5. Von Der Horst v. Von Der HorstCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1898

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Kransky v. Glen Alden Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1946
  2. Tatum v. TatumSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1982
  3. Thorn v. New York City Department of Social ServicesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1981
  4. D'Auria v. LiposkySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1962
  5. Fitzpatrick v. Hudson Coal Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1946

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

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

Powered by the Exa API