Opinion

Schneider v. Sears, Roebuck and Co.

  • 206 Pa. Super. 282
  • 213 A.2d 83
  • 1965 Pa. Super. LEXIS 797
Court
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Filed
Sep 16, 1965
Status
Published
Author
Montgomery
On the bench
Ervin, Wright, Watkins, Montgomery, Flood, Jacobs, Hoffman
Cited by
8 cases

The opinion

*292 Concurring Opinion by

Montgomery, J.:

Although I am not persuaded that the coronary attacks experienced by this claimant on several occasions had any connection with the accident and injury to his leg, I am convinced that there was remaining disability from the leg injury at the time the last “final” receipt was signed. Accepting the testimony of Dr. Curtin, the impartial expert appointed by the Workmen’s Compensation Board, that claimant could not work because of the leg injury, with or without the coronary condition, the disability at that time was total.

Therefore, I concur with the majority that it was proper for the board to set aside that final receipt and to place claimant on a total disability status. If the situation later resolves itself into one entitling appellants to prove a permanent specific loss of the use of the leg, they will not be precluded from taking the necessary action to have the case so adjudicated.

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.