Legal Opinion · Dissent

Morella v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 5, 2007Published

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

  1. Bethenergy Mines, Inc. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  2. Zeigler v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1999

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

Powered by the Exa API