Legal Opinion

Hale v. Metalweld, Inc.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 20, 1968No. Appeal, 1164PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Watkins, J.,

This is an appeal in a workmen’s compensation case by the claimant, Paul N. Hale, from the decision of the Court of Common Pleas No. 4 of Philadelphia County, affirming the order of the Workmen’s Compensation Board denying benefits in a case involving silicosis on the ground that the claimant failed to sustain his burden of proof that he was exposed to the silica hazard.

In April of 1962, the claimant filed an occupational disease petition alleging total disability as a result of silicosis, which total disability began February 26, 1962. He was employed by the defendant…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. DeMascola v. LancasterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  2. Baur v. Mesta MacHine Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
  3. Metz v. Quakertown Stove WorksSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  4. Witters v. Harrisburg Steel CorporationSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
  5. Urbach Unemployment Compensation CaseSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1951

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Williams v. Bonair Foundry Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
  2. Hale v. Metalweld, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
  3. Berger v. BergerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
  4. Tretinik v. United States Steel Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1969

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API