Legal Opinion

Hartzell v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 1, 1986No. Appeal, 2980 C.D. 1985PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Judge Craig,

Does an expert medical opinion that the claimant has fully recovered and may return to his pre-injury employment constitute substantial competent evidence to uphold the referees termination of benefits where the physician, based upon a physical examination of the claimant, first opined that the disability continued, but changed his diagnosis after viewing a surveillance videotape of the claimant moving about apparently without limitation?

Claimant George Hartzell suffered a back injury on January 30, 1979, in the course of his employment at Bowen McLaughlin, York Division…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. DeBattiste v. Anthony Laudadio & SonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
  2. Kope v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  3. Bogavich v. Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
  4. Mertz v. Mellon National Bank & Trust Co.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1974

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Murphy v. Workers Compensation Appeal Board (Mercy Catholic Medical Center)Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  2. Sule v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  3. Thompson v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  4. Korin v. Department of CorrectionsCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  5. Clemente-Volpe v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1993

2 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