Case ID: pa_293/html/0509-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Marletter v. Oscar’s Cafe et al., Appellants.
    
      Workmen’s compensation — Course of employment — Death — Findings — Appeal.
    1. A judgment awarding damages for the death of a workman will be affirmed on appeal where the findings of the referee, sustained by competent evidence and approved by the board and the court below, were in effect that the deceased met with an accident which resulted in his death while following instructions given to him by his employer just before the accident, and was “in process of completing a special errand in furtherance of his employer’s affairs.”
    Argued May 14, 1928.
    Before Moschzisker, C. J., Frazer, Walling, Simpson, Kephart, Sadler and Schaffer, JJ.
    Appeal, No. 200, Jan. T., 1928, by Maryland Casualty Co., insurance carrier, from judgment of C. P. No. 2, Phila. Co., Dec. T., 1927, No. 8258, affirming decision of Workmen’s Compensation Board, awarding compensation in case of Marian Marletter v. Oscar’s Cafe and Maryland Casualty Co., insurance carrier.
    Affirmed.
    Appeal from decision of Workmen’s Compensation Board which affirmed referee’s action in awarding damages. Before Stern and Lewis, JJ.
    The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts.
    Award affirmed. Maryland Casualty Co., insurance carrier, appealed.
    
      Error assigned, inter alia, was judgment, quoting record.
    
      Lows Wagner, with him Richard A. Smith and Wilbur F. Whittle, for appellant.
    
      T. Henry Walnut, for appellee, was not heard.
    June 30, 1928:
   Per Curiam,

The defendant insurance carrier has appealed from a judgment on a workmen’s compensation award in plaintiff’s favor.

The referee found that plaintiff’s husband met with an accident on June 30, 1927, which resulted in his death; that, at the time, he was following instructions, which had been given to him by his employer just before the accident, and was “in process of completing a special errand in furtherance of his employer’s affairs.” Without going into detail, it is enough to say that the referee’s findings, which were approved by the compensation board and the court below, amply sustain the award to plaintiff; these findings are supported by competent evidence.

The judgment is affirmed.