Opinion

Davis v. Smith

  • 262 Pa. 432
  • 105 A. 559
  • 1918 Pa. LEXIS 668
Court
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Filed
Oct 23, 1918
Status
Published
On the bench
Brown, Fox, Frazer, Moschzisker, Simpson, Stewart, Walling
Cited by
2 cases
Authority
More cited than 67.0%

The opinion

Per Curiam,

Neither the first nor the second question appearing in appellant’s statement of the questions involved in this *433 appeal is made the subject of any assignment of error, and they cannot therefore be considered'. The second and third assignments merely complain of the disallowance of appellant’s claim by the referee and the Workmen’s Compensation Board, and the first, of the court’s dismissal of her exceptions to the action of the board. The order of the court below is affirmed at appellant’s costs on the following from its opinion dismissing her exceptions : “We are of the opinion that, in this particular instance, the said board did not exceed its powers. The exception as to that should not be sustained. The other exceptions would lead us into the domain of the facts involved in the case and would require us to find differently. from the board before we could reverse its award. Were we allowed to investigate independently with respect thereto, we might arrive at a different conclusion from that reached by the board, but into this domain, when there is conflicting evidence, we are not allowed to enter. It has been judicially determined that the findings of fact by the Workmen’s Compensation Board, upon appeal from a referee, are final and cannot be disturbed by the courts: Poluskiewicz v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Co., 257 Pa. 305 ."

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.