Legal Opinion

Ingram v. W. J. Rainey, Inc.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 15, 1937No. Appeal, 38PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Cunningham, J.,

The question primarily involved under the record, as printed by the appellant employer in this workmen’s compensation ease, is whether there was legally competent evidence to sustain the award for total disability made to the claimant by the compensation authorities in the sum of $375, upon which judgment was entered by the court below. Counsel for the appellant, in filing their exceptions to the action of the referee and board, have injected into the ease a subsidiary question to which we shall refer later.

Confining ourselves for the present to the judgment appealed…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Lente v. LuciSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
  2. Bausch v. FidlerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
  3. Kessler v. North Side Packing Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  4. Barlock v. Orient Coal & Coke Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  5. Barlock v. Orient Coal & Coke Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Harrington v. Department of Labor & IndustriesWashington Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Walls v. Hodo Chevrolet Company, Inc.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1974
  3. Varghese v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  4. Faulkner Cadillac v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  5. Melfi v. Dick Construction Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1942

11 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