Broderick v. Great Lakes Casualty Co.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Kenworthey, J.;
A third party who has notice cannot, by settlement with an employee, deprive an employer (or insurance carrier) of the subrogation right granted by the Workmen’s Compensation Law. Smith v. Yellow Cab Co., 87 Pa. Superior Ct. 143, aff’d 288 Pa. 85, 135 A. 858; Scalise v. F. M. Venzie & Co., Inc., 301 Pa. 315, 152 A. 90. The question is whether a subrogated employer can maintain an action in assumpsit against a third party who, after notice, has settled with the employee, without proof that the ¡third party was in fact a wrongdoer or was liable to the employee; will the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Smith v. Yellow Cab Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
- Scalise v. F. M. Venzie Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
- Traders & General Ins. Co. v. West Texas Utilities Co.Texas Commission of Appeals · 1942
- Lloyd Adams Inc. v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Georgia · 1940
- Thomas v. Central RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Winfree v. Philadelphia Electric Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
- Travelers Insurance v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
- Reliance Insurance v. Richmond MacHine Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- Smith v. Piper Aircraft Corp.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1955
- Heiser v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.