Sullivan v. Barnett
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
GARTH, Circuit Judge:
The issue we must address on this appeal is whether Pennsylvania’s Workers’ Compensation Act, 77 Pa. Stat. Ann. § 531(5) and (6) (West Supp.1997), which provides for the su-persedeas of an employee’s medical benefits without prior notice or an opportunity to be heard, violates the requisites of procedural due process. We hold that it does. Accordingly, we reverse.
I
The Pennsylvania Workmen’s Compensation Act (“the Act”), 77 Pa. Stat. Ann. § 1 et seq., establishes a compulsory insurance system for employers that provides compensation to employees who…
2Cases cited39 opinions
- Richardson v. PeralesSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- West v. AtkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Morrissey v. BrewerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Sullivan v. BarnettCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1998
- Carter v. City of PhiladelphiaDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1998
- Allyn Shane Doyle A/K/A Shane Doyle v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2015