Legal Opinion

Schrecengost v. O. K. Heilman Trucking Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 29, 1953No. Appeal, 49PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Wright, J.,

TMs case arises under-, the provisions of The Workr men’s Compensation Act of 1915, P. L; 736, as amended, 77 P.S. §1, et seip The claim petition was filed on June 27, 1944, alleging an eye injury in October 1941. During the course of his employment as a truck driver, claimant was using a hammer to drive a steel pin out of the hinges holding a tailgate when he felt something enter his left eye. ■ A fellow employe wiped the eye with a handkerchief, but no foreign body was removed. Claimant immediately gave notice of his injury to the defendant, and then continued at his…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Chase v. Emery Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  2. Creighton v. Continental Roll & Steel Foundry Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  3. Tinsman v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
  4. Somerton v. the Bell Tele. Co. of Pa.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
  5. Hickey v. Cudahy Packing Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1943

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Pellegrino v. Baldwin-Lima-Hamilton Corp.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
  2. Helstrom v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  3. Miller v. Springfield Township Highway DepartmentSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
  4. Shoop v. Chambersburg Baking Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
  5. Mapp v. PhiladelphiaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1969

5 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