Legal Opinion

Dazely v. Luckenbach Steamship Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 17, 1938No. Appeal, 254PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Pee Cueiam,

This is a workmen’s compensation case. The claimant is the widow of William Dazely, a stevedore in the employ of the defendant, who died on March 31, 1933, as the result of an accident in the course of his employment, which occurred two days before.

Dazely’s employment was not constant, but it was not a “seasonal 1 occupation” within the meaning of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, (sec. 309, as amended by Act of June 26, 1919, P. L. 642).

As his work was dependent on the number of defendant’s ships coming into port, there were many days when he had no work. His working days for the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Romig v. Champion Blower & Forge Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
  2. Romig v. Champion B. & F. Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. American Mutual Insurance v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  2. Murillo v. Payroll ExpressNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1995
  3. Dazely v. Luckenbach Steamship Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
  4. Ware v. Northern Metal Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  5. Eisenaucher v. BarronSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1940

3 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