Lente v. Luci
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 341, Jan. T., 1922, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., June T., 1921, No. 2719, sustaining decision of Workmen’s Compensation Board, in case of Antonio Lente v. Frank Luci. Appeal from decision of Workmen’s Compensation Board, sustaining referee’s findings. Before Batter-son, P. J. The facts appear by the opinion of the Supreme Court. Decision affirmed. Plaintiff appealed. Error assigned, inter alia, was order, quoting it.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Kephart,
The claimant, employed by appellee, lost an eye from an injury in the course of employment. The sight of the other eye had been destroyed before his employment by appellee. The referee awarded compensation for the loss of one eye, fixed by section 306, paragraph (c), of the Compensation Act. The board and the court below sus* tained the referee’s findings. It is now before us on ap*219peal, and the sole question is whether compensation should be allowed, under paragraph (a) of section 306, for total disability, the last injury taking from him his remaining sight,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Pater v. Superior Steel Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1919
- Kerwin v. American Railway Express Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Berskis v. Lehigh Valley Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
3Cited by130 opinions
- Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board v. HartliebSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Curran v. Walter E. Knipe & Sons, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
- Woodward v. Pittsburgh Engineering & Construction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
- Killian v. Heintz Div. Kelsey HayesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
- Bausch v. FidlerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
125 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.