Legal Opinion

Rotoblast Abrasives v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided August 3, 1994No. 1942 C.D. 1993PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

DOYLE, Judge.

Before the Court is an appeal by Rotoblast (Employer) from an order of the Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board which affirmed the workers’ compensation judge’s (WCJ) decision to grant benefits to Frank Hockenber-ry (Claimant).

On March 12, 1982, Claimant, a furnace operator, suffered a work related injury when his shirt caught fire while he was sho-velling silicate in a furnace. He was thrown to the floor and rolled around by co-workers attempting to put out the fire. Claimant hit the back of his neck on a beam plate as he fell to the floor. Claimant suffered burns over…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Pieper v. Ametek-Thermox Instruments DivisionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  2. Vitelli v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  3. Fells v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  4. Corcoran v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  5. East West Equipment Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1989

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Yeager 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