Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

GARY EISEL v. U. S. SLICING MACHINE COMPANY (03/20/80)

SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA


decided: March 20, 1980.

GARY EISEL
v.
U. S. SLICING MACHINE COMPANY, INC. AND BERKEL, INCORPORATED, APPELLANTS, V. EAST CARSON PACKING COMPANY, A CORPORATION

Appeal No. 153 March Term, 1979, from the Order of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania at No. 652 April Term, 1978. Entered on July 6, 1979 which Affirmed the Order dated January 24, 1978 and the Judgment Entered on February 5, 1978 of Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, Civil Division at GD77-11433; Silvistri, Judge.

COUNSEL

William R. Tighe, Jr., Stein & Winters, Pittsburgh, for appellants.

Elmer G. Klaber, Pittsburgh, for appellee, East Carson Packing Co.

C. S. Fossee, Pittsburgh, for appellee, Gary Eisel.

Eagen, C. J., and O'Brien, Roberts, Nix, Larsen and Flaherty, JJ. Larsen, J., filed a concurring opinion. Nix, J., concurred in the result.

Author: Flaherty

[ 488 Pa. Page 193]

OPINION OF THE COURT

Gary Eisel filed a complaint in trespass against U. S. Slicing Machine Company, Inc., and Berkel, Inc. alleging that while in the course and scope of his employment with East Carson Packing Company (employer) he sustained serious personal injuries when he slipped and fell against a meat slicer manufactured by the defendants and sold by them to his employer. Berkel, Inc. filed a complaint to join the employer as additional defendant and the employer filed preliminary objections asserting that Section 303(b) of the Pennsylvania Workmen's Compensation Act, Act of December 5, 1974, P.L. 782, No. 263, § 6, 77 P.S. § 481(b) (Supp.1979) barred such joinder. Berkel, Inc. filed a reply to the preliminary objections, claiming that Section 303(b) is unconstitutional. The Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County sustained employer's preliminary objections, and Berkel, Inc. appealed. The Superior Court (sitting as a panel of three judges) affirmed, Pa. Super. , 407 A.2d 36 (1979), relying on its decision in Tsarnas v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., 262 Pa. Super. 417, 396 A.2d 1241 (1978). We granted allocatur and now affirm for the reasons set forth in our opinion filed this day in Tsarnas, supra, 488 Pa. 513, 412 A.2d 1094 (1980).

Order affirmed.

[ 488 Pa. Page 194]

LARSEN, Justice, concurring.

I concur in the result for the reasons expressed in my concurring opinion in Tsarnas v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation, 488 Pa. 513, 412 A.2d 1094 (1980).

19800320

© 1998 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.