P & R Welding & Fabricating v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
CASTILLE, Justice.
The sole issue on appeal is whether the “gross method” or the “net method” should be utilized in calculating an employersVworkers’ compensation insurers’ subrogation rights and liabilities pursuant to Section 319 of the Workers’ Compensation Act, 77 P.S. § 671, with respect to an employee’s recovery in a third-party tort action. Because we hold that the gross method should be utilized in this situation, we affirm the order of the Commonwealth Court.
The relevant facts to this appeal are not in dispute. On July 28, 1985, appellant suffered a work-related…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Rollins Outdoor Advertising v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
- Pendleton v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
- CNA Insurance v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
- Allegheny Intermediate Unit 3 Education Ass'n v. Bethel Park School DistrictSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
3Cited by19 opinions
- Kramer v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
- Darr Construction Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
- Mrkich v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
- Kidd-Parker v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
- Griffin v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.