Larocca v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board

Respectfully, I concur in part and dissent in part. I agree with the majority that IOP 211 is-valid and that where, as here, a pro se letter evidences an intent to appeal, amplification of that pro se document via amendment should be allowed under IOP 211. Further, I agree with the majority’s disposition of the case on the merits of Larocca's appeal. I dissent, however, from its position on the issue pertaining to reconsideration of an order of a single judge.1

Assuming that the law of the case doctrine does apply here, and I do not agree that it does, the authority relied upon by the majority…