Legal Opinion

Bowers v. Schell's Bakery

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 9, 1943No. Appeal, 14PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

The claimant in this workmen’s compensation case is admittedly totally disabled. The disability is due to a coronary occlusion. The main question before the compensation authorities was whether the coronary occlusion was brought about by the exertion of pushing a half-ton bread truck, half-filled with bread, in order to start it when the mechanical starter would not work, or was the natural result of a diseased condition of his heart and arteries. That was a pure question of fact, the decision of which rested on the final fact-finding body, the board. There was competent medical…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Walsh v. Penn Anthracite Mining Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  2. Good v. Pennsylvania Department of Property & SuppliesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
  3. Johnson v. Valvoline Oil Co. (Et Al.)Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  4. Icenhour v. Freedom Oil Works Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  5. Russell v. Scott Paper Co. (Et Al.)Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1940

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Lind v. Argo Lamp Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1962
  2. Revilak v. Coca Cola Co. of Pa.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
  3. Smith v. A. De O. Rossiter & Sons Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
  4. Carl v. American Window Glass Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
  5. Rodgers v. P. G. Publishing Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County1960

1 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