Legal Opinion

Arnold Coal & Supply Co. v. Markle

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 8, 1973No. Appeal, No. 613 C.D. 1972PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Judge Crumlish, Jr.,

The sole issue in this Workmen’s Compensation case is whether the Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board erred as a matter of law in applying the “Unusual Pathological Result Doctrine” to allow recovery by the claimant.

The claimant in this case, Paul C. Markle, was employed by Arnold Coal and Supply Company, Inc. In the winter months he drove an oil truck, and in the summer he worked in the service department cleaning and installing burners, loading furnaces on trucks, and delivering them to the various job sites.

On May 28, 1969, as the claimant assisted his boss in…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Nash v. Sandnes' Sons, Inc.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
  2. Wance v. Gettig Engineering & Mfg. Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
  3. Bailey v. BuzzardSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
  4. Beck v. Container Corp. of AmericaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1966

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Universal Cyclops Steel Corp. v. KrawczynskiCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  2. Palmer v. City of PittsburghCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  3. Czankner v. Sky Top Lodge, Inc.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  4. Regent Bottling Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  5. Jessop Steel Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1973

11 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