# Slipp v. Fidel. Cas. Co. of N.Y.

> Superior Court of Pennsylvania · October 5, 1927 · 91 Pa. Super. 526

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3856026

## Case

- **Full name:** Slipp v. the Fidelity & Casualty Company of New York, Appellant
- **Court:** Superior Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** October 5, 1927
- **Citations:** 91 Pa. Super. 526; 1927 Pa. Super. LEXIS 226
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court by Linn
- **Judges:** Porter, Henderson, Trexler, Keller, Linn, Gawthrop, Cunningham
- **Cited by:** 2 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3856026

## Opinion text

Opinion by
Linn, J.,
This appeal is from a compensation award to a widow. Her deceased husband, employed by appellant, was sent to deliver a draft to William Slipp; on reaching his destination he was obliged to wait a short time until Slipp came in; when Slipp appeared, decedent delivered the draft. Before he left the place, a fight began in the street; the participants rushed into Slipp’s store, and one of them struck decedent, who was not a party to the dispute; the blow caused his death. The evidence does not show clearly how much time elapsed between his delivery of the draft and the assault. The referee found that the time was “only a few minutes,” and that decedent was therefore “actually engaged in the furtherance of the business or affairs of the employer,” within the meaning of Sec. 301,1915, P. L. 736, 739. The board and the court below affirmed. As there is evidence to support the finding, we may not interfere with it. The entire transaction from the time of his entry into the store until the assault was relatively so short, that it cannot be said from the evidence that the continuity of his service was broken; unless it was, liability under the statute followed: Blouss v. D. L. & W. R. R. Co., 73 Pa. Superior
*528
Ct. 95; Dzikowska v. Steel Co., 259 Pa. 578 ; Hale v. Fire Brick Co., 75 Pa. Superior Ct. 454 ; Haddock v. Steel Co., 263 Pa. 120 ; Cymbor v. Binder Coal Co., 285 Pa. 440 .
Judgment affirmed.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3856026. Public record. Not legal advice.