Mark v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION BY
Judge SIMPSON.
In this workers’ compensation case we address supersedeas fund reimbursement under the Workers’ Compensation Act (Act).1 In particular, we are asked to resolve an apparent split of authority. A recent case holds that reimbursement may be had for all payments actually made after supersedeas denial, including payment of benefits awarded retroactively for earlier periods of disability. Another line of cases holds that reimbursement can only be had for payments accruing after supersedeas was requested, which would exclude reimbursement for retroactive benefits attributable…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Jeanes Hospital v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
- Snizaski v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
- M. A. Bruder & Son, Inc. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
- Cunningham v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
- Robb, Leonard & Mulvihill v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Ford Motor/Visteon Systems v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
- Department of Labor & Industry, Bureau of Workers' Compensation v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
- Mercer Lime & Stone Co. v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
- Department of Labor & Industry, Bureau of Workers' Compensation v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
- J.P. Lamb Construction, Inc. v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.