Legal Opinion

Steibing v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 29, 1995PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DOYLE, Judge.

Henry Steibing (Claimant) appeals an order of the Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board, which reversed a referee’s order granting him benefits and, in filing the appeal, he raises an issue of first impression: where a claim has been held to be time barred by the failure to file a petition within the required three year limitation under Section 434 of the Workers Compensation Act, may a claimant raise at any time during the proceedings, even for the first time on appeal, the receipt of Heart and Lung benefits,1 which would toll the running of the statutory time bar, because that…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Com., Dept. of Transp. v. BorosSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  2. Ratto v. Pennsylvania Coal Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
  3. McDevitt v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  4. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board v. NiemannCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  5. McDevitt v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Sharon Steel Corp. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  2. Yonkers v. Donora BoroughCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  3. Cozzone v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  4. Galloway v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  5. Barnes v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1996

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API