Legal Opinion

City of Pittsburgh v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 25, 2013PublishedCited by 46 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

Chief Justice CASTILLE 1

This appeal involves the assignment of the burden of proof in a workers’ compensation case when the employer seeks to modify or suspend a claimant’s benefits on the basis that the claimant has retired. The Commonwealth Court plurality devised a “totality of the circumstances” test and concluded that the employer in the case sub judice failed to show that the injured worker had voluntarily withdrawn from the workforce. For the reasons herein, we affirm the order of the Commonwealth Court.

Dorothy Robinson (“Claimant”) began working as a police officer of the City…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Francis v. FranklinSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. County Court of Ulster Cty. v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  3. Kachinski v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  4. Daniels v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  5. Commonwealth v. ShafferSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1972

24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by46 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. Batts, Q., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  2. Alderwoods (Pennsylvania), Inc. v. Duquesne Light Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  3. Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Childs, W.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
  4. Dixon v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
  5. Turner v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2013

41 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