Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Gibson v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 22, 2004No. 39 WAP 2003Published

1ConcurrenceJustice Saylor

I agree with the majority that the record in this particular case does not contain substantial evidence to support the WCJ’s finding that Decedent had longstanding and continuous *490exposure to asbestos while working for Employer. I am not averse, however, to the Commonwealth Court’s approach of treating the exposure issue as a factual one, or to its flexible application of the substantial evidence standard in this regard. See Gibson v. WCAB (Armco Stainless & Alloy Products), No. 1860 C.D. 2002, op. at_, 861 A.2d 944 (Pa.Cmwlth. May 8, 2003) (en banc) (observing that Commonwealth Court…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Witco-Kendall Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  2. Gray v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1995

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

Powered by the Exa API