Legal Opinion

Quick v. E. B. Kintner & Son

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 6, 1934No. Appeal 40PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Baldrige, J.,

The defendants are engaged in the butcher business. They decided to enlarge their storeroom and to construct, for renting purposes, two apartments on the second floor. They employed the claimant as a carpenter, who worked on the improvements from March 6th until June 1,1932, when he was injured. The claimant filed his petition for compensation. The defendants denied liability on the ground that claimant’s work was casual and not in the regular course of their business. The referee awarded compensation and his action was approved by the hoard and sustained by the court…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Sgattone v. Mulholland & Gotwals, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
  2. Hauger v. Walker Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
  3. Goss Printing Press Co. v. RedmondSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
  4. Dunlap v. Paradise CampSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  5. Fedak v. DzialdowskiSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1934

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Gooden & Clark v. MitchellSuperior Court of Delaware · 1941
  2. Williams v. Baptist Church (Et Al.)Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  3. Tokash v. General Baking Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1942
  4. Dawson v. Joe Chester Artificial Limb Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1941
  5. Jackson v. Cathcart & Maxfield, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1938

4 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