Legal Opinion

Alessandro Petrillo Co. v. Marioni

Superior Court of Delaware

Decided November 13, 1925PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Rodney, J.,

delivering the opinion of the Court:

The issue in this case is a comparatively narrow one. It is not disputed that the appellee suffered a partial but permanent injury to the vision of his left eye and is entitled to some compensation. The sole question to be determined is whether in computing an award for a fractional loss of vision of a claimant, such award should be based upon the percentage of loss of vision without the use of glasses or whether such award should be based .upon the percentage of loss of vision^when such vision is aided and affected by the artificial means of a…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Matter of Marhoffer v. . MarhofferNew York Court of Appeals · 1917
  2. Cline v. Studebaker Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1915
  3. Claim of Frings v. Pierce Arrow Motor Car Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1918
  4. Juergens Bros. v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1919
  5. Marland Refining Co. v. ColbaughSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1925

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Kelley v. ProutyIdaho Supreme Court · 1934
  2. Alloy Surfaces Company v. CicamoreSupreme Court of Delaware · 1966
  3. Graf v. National Steel Products Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1931
  4. McDonald v. Treasurer of State of IdahoIdaho Supreme Court · 1932
  5. Great American Indemnity Co. v. Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 1945

6 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