Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

JAY LINES v. COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA (04/23/82)

decided: April 23, 1982.

JAY LINES, INC. AND COMMERCIAL UNION ASSURANCE COMPANY, PETITIONERS
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD AND CHARLES MANUEL, RESPONDENTS. CAROLYN SUE HADDOCK, ON BEHALF OF HERSELF AND HER MINOR CHILDREN, INTERVENORS



Appeal from the Order of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board in the case of Carolyn Sue Haddock v. Jay Lines, Inc. and Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, No. A-78173.

COUNSEL

Frederick C. Trenor, II, Meyer, Darragh, Buckler, Bebenek & Eck, for petitioners.

No appearance for respondents.

Samuel W. Braver, with him John S. Brendel, Buchanan, Ingersoll, Rodewald, Kyle & Buerger, Professional Corporation, for intervenors.

President Judge Crumlish, Jr. and Judges Rogers and Craig, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by President Judge Crumlish, Jr. Judges Mencer and Palladino did not participate in the decision in this case.

Author: Crumlish, Jr.

[ 66 Pa. Commw. Page 300]

Jay Lines, Inc., appeals a Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board order awarding death benefits*fn1 to the wife and minor children of David Haddock. We affirm.

Haddock, a Missouri resident, was killed in Pennsylvania when he was operating a truck which he owned and leased to Jay Lines, a Texas corporation.

Our scope of review where the party with the burden of proof has prevailed below is limited to determining whether constitutional rights were violated, an error of law was committed, or the necessary findings of fact were supported by substantial evidence. D.L. Clark Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board,

[ 66 Pa. Commw. Page 30149]

Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 535, 537, 411 A.2d 1269, 1270 (1980).

Jay Lines first asserts that the referee erred, as a matter of law, in concluding that an employer-employee relationship existed between itself and the decedent.

The existence of the employer-employee relationship is a legal question. Martin Trucking Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board, 30 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 367, 373 A.2d 1168 (1977). There is no formula for determining the existence of an employer-employee relationship; each case must be determined on the factual matrix.*fn2 J. Miller Co. v. Mixter, 2 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 229, 277 A.2d 867 (1971). Numerous factors must be considered, with the crucial test being whether the alleged employer assumes control of the work to be done and ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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