Legal Opinion

Molz v. Hansell

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 29, 1934No. Appeals 519 and 520PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Keller, J.,

This is a workmen’s compensation case. It has to do with the right of the defendants to subrogation under Section 319 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, (Act of June 2, 1915, P. L. 736), applicable to cases where the employee’s death was caused by the negligent act of a third person.

Thomas R. Flinn, an employee of the defendant, Hansell, was killed on October 30, 1932, while in the course of his employment, under such circumstanóes as to make one Thomas C. Manley liable in damages.

Manley was insured by the Alliance Casualty Company, and, on November 3, 1932, that company…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. McDonald v. Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis R'y Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1896
  2. Thompson v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western RailroadSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1910

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Cairgle v. AMERICAN R. AND SS CORP.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  2. Cairgle v. American Radiator & Standard Sanitary Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  3. FRAZIER v. Oil Chemical Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1962
  4. Smrekar v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
  5. Lawson v. United States. Retz v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1951

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