Legal Opinion · Dissent

McAfee v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided August 30, 1990Published

1DissentPalladino, Judge

I respectfully dissent.

Where a claimant seeks reinstatement of suspended benefits, the claimant must prove that he continues to suffer from a work related injury and that the injury caused a loss of earnings. Andersen v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board (National Forge Company), 113 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 601, 537 A.2d 971 (1988). Claimant argues that his loss of earnings was caused by his injury because his injury forced him to retire.

The majority concludes that “[n]o findings ... were made regarding Claimant’s ability to perform the light-duty job [made] available to Claimant by Employer”.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Dugan v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  2. Andersen v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  3. Elliot v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1983

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API