Legal Opinion

Waselinko v. Volpe Coal Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 1, 1943No. Appeal, 29PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Kenworthey, J.,

Tbe appeal in this workmen’s compensation case turns primarily on tbe meaning of tbe word ‘cut’ in Article XII, Rule 55 of tbe Anthracite Mine Law of June 2, 1891, P. L. 176, 52 P’S §294, which provides:

“No person or persons working in any coal mine or colliery shall cut any props or timbers while the same are in position to support the roof or sides.”

Appellant, with a sledge hammer, knocked down a standing prop in defendant’s mine in order to make it possible to move ¡the pan line. The prop was in position to support the roof of the mine although there was some…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Gima v. Hudson Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
  2. Paul Gima v. the Hudson Coal Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  3. Kozak v. Joseph Reilly Coal Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1940

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Kolonik v. Hudson Coal Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
  2. Skiba v. Nick Calvitti Coal Co. (Et Al.)Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1943

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API