Legal Opinion

Latta v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 23, 1994PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

CAPPY, Justice.

The question before this Court is whether a claimant seeking reinstatement of workmen’s compensation benefits currently under suspension must present expert medical evidence in order to establish that the work-related injury that gave rise to the benefits under suspension continues.1 We hold that expert medical evidence is not necessary to establish that the work-related injury continues. Rather, once a claimant testifies that his work-related injury continues, the burden shifts to his employer to prove the contrary. Where an employer fails to present…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Pieper v. Ametek-Thermox Instruments DivisionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  2. Latta v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  3. Latta v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1992

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Latta v. WCAB (Latrobe Die Casting Co.)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  2. Graphic Packaging, Inc. v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  3. Timcho v. Workers' Comp. Appeal Bd.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
  4. Sweeney v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board (Whitman's Chocolates)Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1997

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

Powered by the Exa API