Legal Opinion

Carl v. American Window Glass Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 20, 1943No. Appeal, 57PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

Claimant’s husband died from a coronary occlusion. She filed a claim for compensation, alleging that his death was due to heat exhaustion, suffered in the course of his employment by the defendant.

A post-mortem examination was performed by Dr. Mayhew, in the presence of Doctors Doncaster and Cervino — the latter of whom was the attending physician — all of whom agreed that death was caused by a coronary occlusion, due to a thrombosis, a natural cause, in no way induced by the alleged heat exhaustion.

The referee found as a fact that “Joseph Carl [claimant’s husband] died on July 27,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Bowers v. Schell's BakerySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
  2. Senchak v. Tech Food Products Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
  3. Hammill v. Matthew Cummings Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1942

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Fronko v. United States Sanitary Manufacturing Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  2. Kish v. T. F. Steele Coal Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1958

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API