Camilli v. Pennsylvania Railroad
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Hirt, J.,
Defendant employer has appealed from a judgment in favor of claimant entered in the court below, sustaining the award of the Workmen’s Compensation Board. The questions raised on this appeal go not to the facts, for there is little dispute, but to the inferences to be drawn from them. From the record we find sufficient competent evidence to sustain the findings of the Board that on September 7,1937, claimant sustained a hernia in the course of his employment and that the injury was the result of an accident.
Plaintiff’s status was that of a machinist’s helper but because of…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Shanks v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. HarringtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad v. YurkonisSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Chicago & North Western Railway Co. v. BolleSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railroad v. Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Palermo v. North East Preserving Works, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
- Gammaitoni v. Gasparini Excavating Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
- Testa v. National Radiator Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
- Eckman v. U. S. Lock & Hardware Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
- Apker v. Crown Can Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1942