City of Philadelphia v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Justice NIGRO.
The primary issue in these cases is whether an employer may modify a workers’ compensation claimant’s disability benefits after the claimant refuses alternative employment on the basis that such employment would result in a suspension of the claimant’s pension benefits. For the following reasons, we hold that it can.
Both Appellee George Szparagowski and Appellant Joseph Milici (collectively, “Claimants”) were working as firefighters for the City of Philadelphia when they sustained work-related injuries that rendered them temporarily totally disabled. In Mr. Szparagowski’s…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Kachinski v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Hebden v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
- Landmark Constructors, Inc. v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Costello)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
- St. Joe Container Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
- City of Philadelphia v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Lewis v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
- Warfield v. ShermerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
- Mason v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
- Delaware County v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
- United States Steel Mining Co. v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.