Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ramich Ex Rel. Ramich v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 29, 1999Published

1DissentFriedman, Judge

I respectfully dissent. In this case, we are asked to decide an issue that this court has never specifically addressed. The issue is whether the language of section 440 of the Workers’ Compensation Act (Act)1 puts all employers on notice that claimants in whose favor a matter has been decided are entitled to an award of attorney fees in addition to the award for compensation unless the employer establishes a reasonable basis for the contest. (Supplemental Brief of Appellant at 8.) The majority does not discuss this issue.

My view is that the clear and unambiguous language of section 440 of the…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Oberneder v. Link Computer Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  2. Commonwealth v. YarrisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  3. Coretsky v. Board of CommissionersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  4. Eugenie v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  5. Weidner v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982

19 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