Legal Opinion

DiSabatino & Sons, Inc. v. Facciolo

Supreme Court of Delaware

Decided June 1, 1973PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CAREY, Justice:

In this workmen’s compensation case, the question is which of two insurance carriers is responsible for payments of benefits for injuries sustained by Albert Facciolo, the nominal appellee, while employed by DiSa-batino & Sons, Inc., the nominal appellant. The Industrial Accident Board imposed the liability upon Security Insurance Group (herein “security”), but ordered Royal Globe Ins. Co. (herein “Royal”) to pay one-half of the medical witness fee and the attorney’s fee. Both insurers have appealed.

Facciolo was first injured on December 2, 1968, at which time Security was the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Alloy Surfaces Company v. CicamoreSupreme Court of Delaware · 1966
  2. Regis v. Lansing Drop Forge Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1970
  3. Jenkins v. Tube Turns, Inc.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1959
  4. Peters's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1954
  5. Pace v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1950

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Harris v. District of Columbia Office of Worker's CompensationDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1995
  2. Standard Distributing Co. Ex Rel. Pennsylvania Manufacturer's Ass'n v. NallySupreme Court of Delaware · 1993
  3. Grover C. Dils Medical Center v. MendittoNevada Supreme Court · 2005
  4. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority v. ReidSupreme Court of Georgia · 2014
  5. Forbes Steel and Wire Co. v. GrahamSupreme Court of Delaware · 1986

14 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