Legal Opinion

Eisenaucher v. Barron

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 11, 1940No. Appeal, 275PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Baldrige, J.,,

May a workmen’s compensation agreement for partial disability be reviewed for mistake after the expiration of 300 weeks, is the question involved in this appeal.

The claimant was employed by the defendant in 1924 as a clerk in his retail store. She worked six days a week at a weekly wage of $20 until 1931, when, owing to a business depression, the defendant arranged with his two clerks that each was to work three days a week at a weekly wage of $10. On December 23, 1932 the claimant sustained a fracture of her left ankle in the course of her employment. A compensation…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Zupicick v. P. & R. C. & I. Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  2. Kessler v. North Side Packing Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  3. Romig v. Champion Blower & Forge Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
  4. Casper v. State Workmen's Insurance FundSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  5. Dazely v. Luckenbach Steamship Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1938

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Hill v. Booth & Flinn Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  2. Vergoni v. VergoniSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
  3. Alan Schmidt v. John SkolasCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2014

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

Powered by the Exa API