Legal Opinion · Dissent

Edwards v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 31, 1990Published

1DissentPalladino, Judge

I respectfully dissent.

I believe the majority has not only overlooked the equivocal nature of the medical testimony, but has ignored the statutory requirements that must be met before the presumption of compensability for occupational diseases can be applied. The following factual background is helpful.

On May 14, 1985, John C. Edwards (Decedent), a volunteer fireman, was called to assist in fighting a brush fire, and was asked to drive a 1967 tanker truck to the scene. Decedent performed this activity in the past. Upon arriving at the scene, Decedent was told to return to the firehouse…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Lewis v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  2. Werner v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  3. Marcks v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  4. Hauck v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  5. Harrigan v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1979

3 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