Legal Opinion

Lemansky v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided August 12, 1999PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

NARICK, Senior Judge.

Michael Lemansky (Claimant) appeals from an order of the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Board) affirming the Workers’ Compensation Judge’s (WCJ) order granting a suspension of Claimant’s wage benefits and denying his request for attorney’s fees. The sole issue presented for our review is whether the WCJ and the Board erred as a matter of law in determining that Claimant was not entitled to reimbursement of reasonable attorney’s fees pursuant to § 440 of the Workers’ Compensation Act (Act). 1 Because we find that Hagan Ice Cream Company (Employer) engaged in an…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Pieper v. Ametek-Thermox Instruments DivisionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  2. Berwick Industries v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  3. Penczkowski v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  4. Cunningham v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  5. Transamerican Office Furniture v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1992

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Waldameer Park, Inc. v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  2. Gumm v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
  3. Brutico v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
  4. Armstrong v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  5. Orenich v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2004

16 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