Legal Opinion
Plasteel Products Corp. v. Commonwealth
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
Decided November 17, 1977No. Appeal, No. 1882 C.D. 1976PublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Judge Mencer,
The difficult question presented by this appeal from an order of the Workmen’s Compensation Ap*407peal Board (Board) concerns the meaning of the term “injury” in occupational disease cases.
After 32 years of work as an underground coal miner, Robert L. Smith was employed by Plasteel Products Corporation (Plasteel) as a general maintenance man, electrician helper, and batch mixer. During his 11 years of service for Plasteel, Smith was regularly required to operate a machine which, through vibrations, sifted sand from mica. The operation generated moderately thick dust, the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Fruehauf Corp. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
- Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board v. Overmyer Mold Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
- Industrial Services Contracting, Inc. v. WilsonCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
- Scott v. United States Steel Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
- Imperial Food Products v. TomarelliCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Katz v. Evening BulletinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
- DeMarco v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Hayden v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
- Lash v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
- Rettinger v. American Can Co.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1983
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.