Legal Opinion

Szymanski v. Culmerville Coal Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 9, 1940No. Appeal, 165PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Hirt, J.,

Frank Szymanski, claimant’s husband, was employed by defendant as a coal miner, for years. In October 1936 be had been operated upon for a perforating duodenal ulcer. Because of accompanying infection and extensive peritonitis the incision did not completely heal until the following April leaving a “weak area” at the site of the incision. In May 1937 he returned to work with defendant company as a coal loader. On June 24, 1937, overexertion in moving an excessively heavy piece of bony caused a break in the wall of the abdomen through the long incision of the former…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Jones v. Phila. & Reading C. & I. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
  2. Shuler v. Midvalley Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
  3. Eberst v. Sears Roebuck & Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
  4. Reichner v. P. Blakiston's Son & Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  5. Watson v. Lehigh Coal & Navigation Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. General Tire & Rubber Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  2. Wahs v. Wolf (Et Al.)Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
  3. Federoff v. Union Collieries Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
  4. Schrein v. Fleischmann's Vienna Model Bakery, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  5. Krumrine v. Titan Metal Manufacturing Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1941

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