Fedak v. Dzialdowski
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opiniow by
Lenn, J.,
The question is whether the Workmen’s Compensation Board should have granted claimant’s petition for rehearing, instead of dismissing it and affirming the d’sallowanee of the claim by the referee. On appeal, the common pleas affirmed the action of the board.
The board has ample power to grant rehearings; Sec. 426, 1919, P. L. 642, 645; 1927, P. L. 186, 196; 77 PS Sec. 871; Manley v. Lycoming Motors Corp., 83 Pa. Superior Ct. 173.
Claimant’s husband was killed by a fall in the course of his employment as carpenter. It was said in argument that claimant was illiterate and…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Callihan v. MontgomerySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Blake v. WilsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- Marsh v. GronerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1917
- Gairt v. Curry Coal Mining Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Manley v. Lycoming Motors Corp., Etc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Petrovan v. Rockhill Coal & Iron Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
- Powell v. SonntagSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1946
- Greeby v. Phila. Asbestos Co. (Et Al.)Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
- Fedak v. DzialdowskiSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
- Lako v. SCHLESSINGERSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.