Legal Opinion

Emi Co. v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 2, 1999PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

NARICK, Senior Judge.

The issues presented are whether Arthur Rathman’s (Claimant’s) loss of earning power was due to a work-related injury or whether it was due to his layoff for economic reasons, whether the testimony of Claimant’s physician was incompetent as a matter of law, and - whether EMI Company (Employer) is entitled to a credit for severance pay provided to Claimant upon his layoff. Because the Workers’ Compensation-Appeal Board (Board) correctly resolved these issues, the decision of the Board, which granted benefits pursuant to the Workers’ Compensation Act,1 is affirmed.

The…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Bethenergy Mines, Inc. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  2. Newcomer v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  3. Wallace v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  4. Ogden Aviation Services v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1996

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Kramer v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Rite Aid Corp.)Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  2. Daley v. Spinnaker Industries, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2002
  3. Kramer v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Rite Aid Corp.)Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2002

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API