Legal Opinion

Bingaman v. Baldwin Locomotive Works, Inc.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 13, 1946No. Appeal, 11PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Rhodes, J.,

The question for determination on this appeal has been stipulated as follows: Did Dallas M. Bingaman’s employment with defendant satisfy the statutory requirement of “an aggregate employment of at least four years in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, during a period of eight years next preceding the date of disability, in an occupation having a silica or asbestos hazard”?

Dallas M. Bingaman filed a claim petition on September 9, 1940, and set forth therein that he became totally disabled on December 8, 1939, as a result of silicosis while in the course of his employment…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Roschak Et Ux. v. Vulcan Iron WorksSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
  2. Agostin v. Pittsburgh Steel Foundry Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
  3. Tokash v. Early Foundry Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
  4. McGarvey v. Butler Consolidated Coal Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
  5. Hurtuk v. H. C. Frick Coke Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1945

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Holahan v. Bergen Coal Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
  2. Porter v. Sterling Supply Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
  3. Rohner v. Fox ProductsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1949
  4. Webster v. Grove City CollegeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1962
  5. Crandall v. Downington Iron WorksSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1958

11 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