Legal Opinion · Dissent

Allegheny Ludlum Corp. v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 22, 2010Published

1Dissent

DISSENTING OPINION BY

Senior Judge KELLEY.

I respectfully dissent. The law regarding the requirement for medical evidence of record proving Claimant’s awareness of the work-relatedness of her injury in this matter is clear, and the record herein, as well as the WCJ’s credibility determinations, control. The Majority relies upon evidence not expressly found credible by the WCJ, draws a conclusion therefrom in contradiction to the credibility determinations of the WCJ, and extracts inferences from the evidence that are adverse to Claimant, the prevailing party before the WCJ and the Board.

The…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. General Electric Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  2. Sell v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  3. Grabish v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  4. Bentley v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2009

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

Powered by the Exa API