Barr v. Atlantic Elevator Company
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Kblleb, P. J.,
The controlling factor in this workmen’s compensation case was a question of fact, not of law. The ultimate fact finding body, the board, approving the findings of the referee, decided that question in favor of the claimant. This requires us to sustain the award and affirm the judgment, if there was competent evidence to support it.
Claimant’s husband, William M. Barr, was employed by the defendant on inspection and repair work—about three-fourths of his time being given to inspection and one-fourth to repair service—the latter being the heavier work. He was fifty-five…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Witt v. Witt's Food Mkt. (Et Al.)Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
- O'Neill v. Lehigh Coal & Navigation Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
- Betts v. American Stores Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
- Samoskie v. Philadelphia & Reading C. & I. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Mooney v. YeagleSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Washko v. Ruckno, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
- Royko v. Logan Coal Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
- Foster v. State College BoroughSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
- Nelson v. Borough of GreenvilleSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
- Pudlosky v. Follmer Trucking Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.