Legal Opinion

Talmo v. New Castle County

Supreme Court of Delaware

Decided December 23, 1982PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HERRMANN', Chief Justice:

In this appeal from a decision of the Superior Court affirming a denial by the Industrial Accident Board (hereinafter “the Board”) of workmen’s compensation benefits, we are asked to reconsider the “unusual exertion” standard of compensability presently applied by this Court in pre-exist-ing physical condition cases. See General Motors Corp. v. Veasey, Del.Supr., 371 A.2d 1074 (1977).

I

The claimant, Anthony F. Taimo, was employed with the New Castle County Department of Public Works as a maintenance and construction worker during the period November, 1972 through July,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Hamilton v. Procon, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
  2. General Motors Corp. v. VeaseySupreme Court of Delaware · 1977
  3. Reynolds v. Continental Can CompanySupreme Court of Delaware · 1968
  4. Talmo v. New Castle CountySuperior Court of Delaware · 1982
  5. Faline v. Guido & Francis DeAscanis & SonsSuperior Court of Delaware · 1963

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Battista v. Chrysler Corp.Superior Court of Delaware · 1986
  2. General Motors Corp. v. JarrellSuperior Court of Delaware · 1985
  3. Willingham v. Kral Music, Inc.Superior Court of Delaware · 1985
  4. Mr. Pizza, Inc. ex rel. Home Insurance Co. v. SchwartzSupreme Court of Delaware · 1985
  5. Haveg Industries, Inc. v. HumphreySupreme Court of Delaware · 1983

2 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