Legal Opinion

Hamer v. Rishel

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 29, 1941No. Appeal, 39PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Cunningham, J.,

The employer in this workmen’s compensation case, Ashley Rishel, was the father of the deceased employee, Walter Rishel, who died on. June 22,1936, from “rheumatic heart disease.” Decedent and two brothers were employed by their father as carpenters. His widow, Kathryn Rishel, claimed compensation for herself, and two young children, upon the theory that during the course of her husband’s employment on March 10, 1936, his preexisting heart disease was so aggravated by the “exertion” put forth by him in carrying certain wooden doors from one part of a building to…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Crispin v. Leedom Worrall Co. (Et Al.)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  2. Royko v. Logan Coal Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  3. Crispin v. Leedom Worrall Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
  4. Pastva v. Forge Coal Min. Co., Ap.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1935

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Hamilton v. Procon, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
  2. Cordero v. Comisión IndustrialSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1948
  3. Evancik v. Coal Mining Co. of Graceton, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
  4. Senchak v. Tech Food Products Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
  5. Pryor v. Sweet's Steel Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1942

3 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