Legal Opinion
Harry Berkowitz, Guardian of the Estate of Wilson Kinch, a Minor, and Wilson Kinch v. Philadelphia Chewing Gum Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided May 31, 1962No. 13762_1PublishedCited by 34 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BIGGS, Chief Judge.
The issue presented by the appeal at bar is said to be whether there has been a rejection of the provisions of The Pennsylvania Workmen’s Compensation Act, 77 P.S. § 1 et seq., so as to allow a suit on behalf of the minor against his employer as at common law. For reasons which will appear hereinafter we do not reach this question.
Wilson Kinch, when he was 18 years old, got a job with the defendant, Philadelphia Chewing Gum Corporation. Soon thereafter he sustained serious injuries by getting his right hand caught in a machine at the chewing gum factory. Forty-eight days…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Mitchell v. MaurerSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Underwood v. MaloneyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1958
- Corabi v. Auto Racing, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1959
- Loretta Dixon Fallat, Guardian of the Estate of Cyril Dixon, a Weak-Minded Person v. John A. GouranCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1955
- Berkowitz v. Philadelphia Chewing Gum Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1961
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Gratton Earl Moore v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1970
- McSparran v. WeistCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1968
- Mikhail v. KahnDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2014
- Robert Swindol v. Aurora Flight Sciences Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2015
- Luther W. Borror, Administrator of the Estate of Bonita Ann Curtician, Deceased v. Sharon Steel Company, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1964
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.