Legal Opinion

Imperial Food Products v. Tomarelli

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 11, 1977No. Appeal, No. 461 C.D. 1976PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Judge Blatt,

On July 30, 1974, Mimo Tomarelli (claimant) filed a workmen’s compensation claim petition under Section 108(n) of The Pennsylvania Workmen’s Compensation Act1 (Act), 77 P.S. §27.1(n), which provides, inter alia, as follows:

The term ‘occupational disease’ as used in this act, shall mean only the following diseases.

*152(n) All other diseases (1) to which the claimant is exposed by reason of his employment, and (2) which are causally related to the industry or occupation, and (3) the incidence of which is substantially greater in that industry or occupation than in the general…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Universal Cyclops Steel Corp. v. KrawczynskiCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  2. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board v. Jones & Langhlin Steel Corp.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  3. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board of Commonwealth v. DelgadoCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1975

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Mrs. Smith's Frozen Foods Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  2. Fruehauf Corp. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  3. Plasteel Products Corp. v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  4. Borovich v. Colt IndustriesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  5. Millcraft Corp. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1977

7 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