Legal Opinion

Conrad v. Aero-May. Tran. Co. (Et Al.)

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 16, 1943No. Appeal, 23PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Keller, P. J.,

The sole question raised by this appeal is the effect on the existing law of the amendment to the subrogation section, 319, of the Workmen’s Compensation Act of 1915, P. L. 736, by the Act of June 4, 1937, P. L. 1552, p. 1575—which was left unchanged by the Act of June 21, 1939, P. L. 520, p. 545.

Section 319, as originally enacted, read as follows:

“Where a third person is liable to the employe or the dependents for the injury or death, the employer shall be subrogated to the right of the employe or the dependents against such third person, but only to the extent of the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Wilson v. Pittsburgh B. & I. WorksSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
  2. Ellis v. Atlantic Refining Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Wall v. Conn Welding & Machine Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1962
  2. Soliday v. Hires Turner Glass Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
  3. Carter v. WooleySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1974
  4. Zasslow v. Service Blue Print CompanyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1956
  5. Charles v. Grimm v. O. K. Keckley Co., and Third-Party v. Ramclif Supply and Evans Products Company, Third-Party Appeal of Evans Products CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1977

4 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