Legal Opinion

Merryman v. United States Steel Corp.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 14, 1976No. Appeal, 144 C.D. 1976PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Judge Rogers,

A Workmen’s Compensation referee found that an eye injury suffered by Robert Merryman was not related to his occupation and thus not covered by The Pennsylvania Workmen’s Compensation Act. The Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board, without taldng evidence, good naturedly set aside the determination of the-referee and remanded the case, to the referee “to give claimant the opportunity to present medical evidence, and, of course, to give the parties the- opportunity to present any other evidence they may desire.” The defendant employer has now filed an appeal from this…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Forbes Pavilion Nursing Home, Inc. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  2. United Metal Fabricators, Inc. v. ZindashCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  3. Screw & Bolt Division of Modulus v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
  4. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board v. Borough of FerndaleCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  5. Shipp v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1974

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Anzese v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  2. Metalstand Furniture Manufacturing Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  3. Zurn Industries, Inc. v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  4. Doylestown Processing Co. v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1979

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

Powered by the Exa API