Legal Opinion
Lengyel v. Bohrer
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided February 13, 1953No. Appeals, 68 and 69PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Chief Justice Horace Stern,
A young lad was employed in violation of the provisions of the Child Labor Act of May 13, 1915, P. L. 286, as amended. The question here presented is whether he and his parents can assert a right of action in trespass against his employer or whether their remedy is confined to the Workmen’s Compensation Act.
In November, 1950, George J. C. Lengyel, then 14 years of age, was employed by Marvin Bohrer as office boy for Marvin Bohrer, Inc., a corporation operating a lumber and millwork plant. In the beginning he was not required to work with or about any…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Pettigrew v. PettigrewSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Williams v. SamuelSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
- Lincoln v. National Tube Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- King v. Darlington Brick & Mining Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- Krutlies v. Bulls Head Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Evans v. Allentown Portland Cement Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
- Berkowitz v. Philadelphia Chewing Gum Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1961
- Saloon Restaurant Enterprises v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- Green v. Sun Oil Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1977
- John Schick, Administrator of the Estate of Joseph Schick, Deceased v. Good Humor Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1971
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.