Legal Opinion
Sturgill v. M & M, INC.
Supreme Court of Delaware
Decided November 15, 1974PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DUFFY, Justice:
We here consider cross-appeals from the Superior Court which reviewed an award by the Industrial Accident Board. Two issues are presented under the Workmen’s Compensation Act: the compensability of that part of a disability attributed to psychogenic causes, and the exclusion of “tips” as wages in computing the compensation basis.
I
Claimant petitioned the Board for compensation under 19 Del.C. § 2326 for permanent physical impairment of her back and left leg resulting from an accident arising out of and in the course of her employment. 1 Both parties agree that claimant is…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Powers's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1931
- Claim of Sloat v. Rochester Taxicab Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1917
- Opinion of the JusticesSupreme Court of Delaware · 1972
- Matter of Sloate v. . Rochester Taxicab CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1917
- Ernest Di Sabatino & Sons, Inc. v. ApostolicoSupreme Court of Delaware · 1970
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- DiSabatino Bros., Inc. v. WortmanSupreme Court of Delaware · 1982
- Hazout v. Tsang Mun TingSupreme Court of Delaware · 2016
- Mario Flores v. Carnival Cruise LinesCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1995
- Moore v. Wilmington Housing AuthoritySupreme Court of Delaware · 1993
- Marker v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 1982
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.