Legal Opinion · Dissent

Bambrick v. Asten Hill Mfg. Co.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 25, 1972No. Appeals Nos. 867 C. D. 1971, 872 C. D. 1971, 873 C. D. 1971 and 912 C. D. 1971Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

Judge Kramer:

I respectfully but vigorously dissent.

The decisional law of this Commonwealth requires that courts liberally construe the Occupational Disease *672Act (Act), Act of June 21, 1939, P. L. 566, as amended, 77 P.S. 1201, et seq., in favor of the employee so as to effectuate the remedial and humanitarian purposes of the Act. See Habovick v. Curtiss-Wright Corp., 207 Pa. Superior Ct. 80, 215 A. 2d 389 (1965); Butler v. U. S. Steel Corp., 205 Pa. Superior Ct. 508, 211 A. 2d 35 (1965); DeMascola v. City of Lancaster, 200 Pa. Superior Ct. 365, 189 A. 2d 333 (1963).

This…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. DeMascola v. LancasterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  2. State Workmen's Insurance Fund v. YoungCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
  3. Stump v. Follmer Trucking Co.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
  4. Butler v. United States Steel Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
  5. Habovick v. Curtiss-Wright Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1965

1 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