Legal Opinion

Barton v. Federal Enameling & Stamping Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 16, 1936No. Appeal, 201PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Cunningham, J.,

The single question involved upon this appeal, taken by the employer and its insurance carrier in a workmen’s compensation case from the judgment entered in the court below upon an award by the referee and board, is whether the fatal accident to claimant’s husband on the early morning of December 23, 1933, occurred upon the “premises” of the employer, within the meaning of Section 301 of our Workmen’s Compensation Act of June 2, 1915, P. L. 736, 738.

It is conceded by counsel for appellants in their statement of the question that “the accident occurred while [the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Feeney v. N. Snellenburg & Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
  2. Tolan v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  3. Molek v. W. J. Rainey, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1935

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Epler v. North American Rockwell Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  2. Young v. Hamilton Watch Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
  3. Dunphy v. Augustinian College of VillanovaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
  4. Strunk v. E. D. Huffman & SonsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  5. Fedorko v. Pennsylvania Electric Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1947

3 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