Allen v. Bill's Tire Shop, Maryland Casualty Co.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Linn, J.,
After a Workmen’s Compensation agreement had been satisfied by a final receipt, claimant’s petition to re-open the case was granted on the ground that he had erroneously failed to include an item of $100 for medical expenses. The referee and the board allowed $33; the court disregarded their findings of fact, made its own, and awarded $100. The insurance carrier appeals.
In Vorbnoff v. Machine Co., 286 Pa. 199, at 205 it is said: “Section 427 of the Act of 1919 [P. L. 665] which takes the place of section 425 in the original statute [1915 P. L. 754] States that ‘Any party…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Vorbnoff v. Mesta Machine Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
- Kuca v. Lehigh Valley Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- Denne v. Plymouth Coal Mining Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
- Luckenbill v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
3Cited by3 opinions
- Icenhour v. Freedom Oil Wks. Co. (Et Al.)Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- Garrahan v. Glen Alden Coal Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- Todd v. State Workmen's Insurance FundSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928