Morella v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
1Dissent
DISSENTING OPINION BY
Judge McGINLEY.
I respectfully dissent to the majority’s conclusion that “[biased on the facts as found by the WCJ, the only substantial evidence was that Claimant could work full-time, and it was within the Board’s *603province to make the WCJ’s findings conform to the award.” (footnote omitted).
In the present matter, the WCJ found that Claimant was capable of returning only to part-time work of twenty hours per week. See WCJ’s Findings of Fact No. 1 at 6. Upon review of the record the Board modified the WCJ’s award and reduced Claimant’s compensation rate to reflect…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Bethenergy Mines, Inc. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
- Zeigler v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1999