Cartin v. Standard Tin Plate Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 97, Oct. T., 1917, by defendant, from order of C. P. Washington Co., May T., 1918, No. 32, dismissing appeal from decision of Workmen’s Compensation Board allowing claim in case of Charles Cartin v. Standard Tin Plate Company. Appeal from Workmen’s Compensation Board.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 97, Oct. T., 1917, by defendant, from order of C. P. Washington Co., May T., 1918, No. 32, dismissing appeal from decision of Workmen’s Compensation Board allowing claim in case of Charles Cartin v. Standard Tin Plate Company. Appeal from Workmen’s Compensation Board. McIlvaine, P. J., filed the following opinion: “As we view the Workmen’s Compensation Board it is, in effect, a tribunal chosen by the parties to settle a dispute between them, its award to be final and conclusive unless the award as made is in violation of some law or is obtained by fraud. This court has…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
The question here sought to be raised was clearly one of fact not of law, and the learned court very properly decided that into such controversy it could not enter. Poluskiewicz v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Co., 257 Pa. 305, is a case in point.
Appeal dismissed at appellant’s cost.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Poluskiewicz v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1917
3Cited by8 opinions
- Morocho v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Home Equity Renovations, Inc.)Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
- Chovic v. Pittsburgh Crucible Steel Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1919
- Fillip v. Wm. Cramp & Sons Ship & Engine Building Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Michetti v. State Workmen's Insurance FundSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
- Hager v. Norristown Magnesia Asbestos Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.