Legal Opinion
Kachinski v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided October 15, 1987No. 59 E.D. Appeal Docket 1986PublishedCited by 482 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
McDERMOTT, Justice.
Allocatur was granted in this case to examine the degree to which an employer must prove the availability of suitable employment for a disabled claimant before a modification of benefits may be effected. The facts of this case are as follows.
Joseph Kachinski was a mechanic employed by Vepco Construction Company. On January 19, 1981, while working on employer’s premises, Mr. Kachinski was injured when a paint can exploded. The explosion caused Mr. Kachinski to fall off the machine he was working on, thereby injuring his back. The explosion also caused extensive facial…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Flemming v. NestorSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- United States v. DemkoSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Barrett v. Otis Elevator Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
- Unora v. Glen Alden Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
- Petrone v. Moffat Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by482 opinions
- House v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
- Shick v. ShireySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
- Williams v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
- Tim Neal v. Annett Holdings, Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 2012
- Phoenixville Hospital v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
477 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.