Legal Opinion

Leed v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 11, 1986No. Appeal, No. 1803 C.D. 1984PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Judge Rogers,

James Leed (claimant) has filed a petition for review of an order of the Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board (board) affirming a referee’s decision denying him benefits for his alleged total disability on the ground that he failed to meet his burden to prove that the incidence of the condition of which he complained—aggravation of his disabling lung condition— was greater in the casting or foundry industry than in the general population, as required by Section 108(n) of The Pennsylvania Workmen’s Compensation Act (Act), Act of June 2, 1915, P.L. 736, as amended, 77 P.S.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Plasteel Products Corp. v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  2. Pawlosky v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  3. Sandusky v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  4. Stanton v. Ben Rubin Ajax Cleaners-DyersCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  5. Arlington Auto Body Service v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1985

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. General Refractories Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  2. Pittsburgh Board of Education v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  3. Rightley v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  4. Leed v. WCAB (QUAKER ALLOY CAST. CO.)Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1986

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

Powered by the Exa API