Legal Opinion

Sulewski v. Baldwin Locomotive Works

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 12, 1951No. Appeal, 91PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Gunther, J.,

John Sulewski,. appellant,, sought ' compensation under The Pennsylvania ■ Occupational Disease. Act of 1939, P. L. 566, as amended, 77 PS §1201, for total disr ability resulting from .antbraco-silieosis. Both .the referee and the board . disallowed, compensation on the ground that claimant had not been exposed to a silica hazard. The court below affirmed the order of the compensation authorities and this appeal followed.

The sole question determinative of this appeal is whether the employer, Baldwin Locomotive Works, offered competent and substantial evidence to support…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Walsh v. Penn Anthracite Mining Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  2. District of Columbia's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  3. Jaloneck v. Jarecki Manufacturing Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
  4. Metz v. Quakertown Stove WorksSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  5. Bingaman v. Baldwin Locomotive Works, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1946

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Gill v. FIVESSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
  2. Witters v. Harrisburg Steel CorporationSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
  3. Silvers v. Philco Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
  4. Stampone v. Anthony Dally & Sons, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
  5. Ispeky v. Bethlehem Steel Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Northampton County1960

1 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