Legal Opinion
Beyer v. Porter-Hayden
Supreme Court of New Jersey
Decided October 6, 1986PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Per curiam
In this case we are called upon to interpret N.J.S.A. 34:15-95.4 (the Act), which provides for a “special adjustment benefit” (SAB) to supplement the basic workers’ compensation benefits received by certain employees or dependents whose basic benefits were set “at a rate applicable prior to January 1, 1980.” The Judge of Compensation ruled that the survivor of a worker who was injured in 1972, but died in 1982, was not entitled to a SAB. The Appellate Division reversed in a well-reasoned opinion. 212 N.J.Super. 539 (1985).
The Appellate Division calculated respondent’s basic benefit under…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Beyer v. Porter-HaydenNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1985
- Rybski v. Johns-Manville Prods. Corp.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1982
3Cited by5 opinions
- TAYLOR BY TAYLOR v. Engelhard IndustriesNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1989
- Wehrle v. American Can Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1988
- Jenkins v. Johns-Manville Products Corp.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1990
- Beyer v. Porter-HaydenSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1986
- Wehrle v. American Can Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1988