Legal Opinion

Pataky v. Allen Motor Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 8, 1930No. Appeal 419PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Teexler, P. J.,

There is bnt one question submitted, “Was there sufficient legal and competent proof to sustain a claim under the Workmen’s Compensation Act?” We agree with the referee, the Workmen’s Compensation Board and the court below that there was. In support of the claim, the following evidence was produced: When working under a car in the garage of the Allen Motor Company Pataky, plaintiff’s deceased husband, was about twenty or thirty feet away from an automobile which was running and discharging from the exhaust. Pataky quit work, stating that he could not stand the gas and…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Johnston v. Payne-Yost Construction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
  2. Ford v. A. E. Dick Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
  3. Poluski v. Glen Alden Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
  4. John v. Reick-Mcjunkin Dairy Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  5. Wiltbank v. Fire Assn. of Phila.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Johnston v. OrcuttSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
  2. Gerst Et Ux. v. Smith-Faris Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  3. O'Boyle v. Harry Seitz & SonsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  4. Stafford v. Roadway Transit Co.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1947
  5. Sinkiewicz v. Susquehanna Collieries Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1934

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