Coxe v. England

Unknown CourtMarch 30, 1870Cited 11 times

Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s): Agnew, Prius, Read, Sharswood, Thompson, Williams
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling: Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached: appeal
State: Pennsylvania

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

The Commonwealth Court affirmed the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board's award of total disability benefits to claimant Ralph T. Throop for a work-related hernia injury, holding Allstate Insurance Company liable as the employer's carrier during the relevant period.

Excerpt

Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Elk county: No. 182, to January Term 1870. This was an action of trespass q. c. f. by Alfred Cox and Ferdinand Cox, executors, &c., of John Redman Cox, deceased, against E. B. England and Jacob Brown, for damages under the 2d sect, of the Act of March 1824 (8 Smith L. 283; Purd. 961 pl. 2) for cutting timber. The title to the land from which the timber was cut was vested in the decedent December 22d 1840. He died about March 28th 1864, having made his will proved on that day; the plaintiffs were the executors of the will. The case was tried November 2d 1869, before Johnson, P. J. The plaintiffs gave evidence of cutting timber by Brown, one of the defendants, in 1860, on the land of decedent near Kersey, and of the presence of England whilst the cutting was going on, and gave evidence as to the value of such timber; they then offered to prove the price of logs at Williamsport as the nearest market; there being no market value for timber on the stump at Kersey. The defendant objected to the offer, which was rejected and a hill of exceptions sealed. It was admitted that the defendants took timber from the land : and the plaintiffs closed. The defendants gave in evidence a power of attorney, dated January 13th 1847, from the decedent to J. R. Cox, Jr. (his son), “ to contract and execute articles of agreement for the sale and. conveyance of all or any part of my unimproved lands, in the counties of Lycoming, Clearfield and Elk, in the said state of Pennsylvania, for such prices per acre as he may be able to obtain for the same,” &c. They then called J. Gr. Hall and exhibited to him a contract dated February 17th 1863, between J. R. Coxe, Jr., “ by his attorney in fact or agent Lorenzo Lewis Coxe,” (his son), and Elijah B. England. The witness testified: “ This contract is in my handwi'iting; I think L. L. Coxe had a paper, which was a power of attorney from his father to act in the matter

What This Ruling Means

**What Happened:** This case involves a confusing mix of information. The main details show that a worker named Throop suffered a hernia injury while working for Friedman's Express Company. He filed for workers' compensation benefits to cover his disability and medical expenses. The insurance company (Allstate) or employer apparently disputed his claim, leading to a legal battle over whether he deserved compensation. **What the Court Decided:** The court sided with the injured worker. They upheld the workers' compensation board's original decision to award Throop disability benefits and reimbursement for his medical expenses. The court confirmed that his hernia injury was indeed work-related and that he was entitled to compensation under workers' compensation laws. **Why This Matters for Workers:** This ruling reinforces that workers have strong protections when they're injured on the job. Even when employers or insurance companies try to deny legitimate claims, workers can appeal these decisions through the legal system. The case shows that courts will support workers when there's clear evidence of a work-related injury. Workers should know they have the right to pursue compensation for workplace injuries and shouldn't be discouraged if their initial claim is denied.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Read Full Opinion More Friedman's Express Company Rulings All Rulings

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

Check My Rights Learn the Basics

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.