Legal Opinion

Piad Corp. v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 25, 2000No. 2262 C.D. 1999PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DOYLE, President Judge.

In this workers’ compensation case, Piad Corporation (Employer) changed workers’ compensation carriers after Thomas Mosk-yok (Claimant) became symptomatic for carpal tunnel syndrome, but before that condition was diagnosed or medical expenses were incurred. 1 The Workers’ Compensation Judge (WCJ) determined that the date of injury was January 18, 1995, and concluded that Employer and its risk carrier AIG Claim Services (AIG) were responsible for payment of Claimant’s medical expenses. AIG appealed to the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Board), which reversed the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Morey v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  2. Beveridge v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  3. Brooks v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  4. Bolitch v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  5. Curran v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1995

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. City of Philadelphia v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
  2. Potter v. McCullaNebraska Supreme Court · 2014
  3. Gentex Corp. v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
  4. Zippo Manufacturing Co. v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  5. Acme Standex v. WCAB (Gomez and Roma Aluminum Co. Inc.)Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2018

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

Powered by the Exa API