Case Name: Oldendorf v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., Appellant
Court: Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1923-07-12
Citations: 81 Pa. Super. 181
Docket Number: Appeal, No. 122
Parties: Oldendorf v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., Appellant.
Judges: Before Porter, Henderson, Trexler, Keller, Linn and Gawthrop, JJ.
Reporter: Pennsylvania Superior Court Reports
Volume: 81
Pages: 181–182

Head Matter:
Oldendorf v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., Appellant.
Practice — Superior Court — Appeals—Equal division of appellate judges.
On an appeal from the judgment of the court of common pleas, affirming an award of the Workmen’s Compensation Board, where the appellate court is equally divided, the judgment of the lower court will be affirmed.
Argued April 26, 1923.
Appeal, No. 122, April T., 1923, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Allegheny Co., April T., 1922, No. 2241, affirming award of the Workmen’s Compensation Board, in the case of Walter G. Oldendorf v. The Pennsylvania Railroad Company.
Before Porter, Henderson, Trexler, Keller, Linn and Gawthrop, JJ.
Affirmed.
Appeal from award of Workmen’s Compensation Board. Before Ford, J.
Upon proceedings for compensation the question presented was whether or not the claimant was in the course of his employment when injured. The referee awarded compensation. The Workmen’s Compensation Board affirmed the award. The court of common pleas, upon appeal, also affirmed the award and entered judgment thereon. The defendant appealed.
Errors assigned were the judgment of the court, quoting it, and refusal to sustain defendant’s exceptions.
Harry Z. Maxwell, and with him Dalzell, Fisher & Dalzell, for appellant.
No appearance and no printed brief for appellee.
July 12, 1923:

Opinion:
Per Curiam,
This is an appeal from the Workmen's Compensation Board. The board affirmed the finding of the referee in favor of the claimant in the sum of $126. The court of common pleas, upon appeal by the defendant, affirmed the finding of the compensation board, but instead of entering judgment for the amount of that finding, inadvertently entered judgment in the sum of $426. This mistake the court subsequently corrected and modified the judgment so that it stands for $126, the amount awarded by the referee. The six judges who sat at the argument of this case are equally divided in opinion, and as a consequence the assignments of error are dismissed.
The judgment, as modified, is affirmed.