Legal Opinion

Hannigan v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 1, 2004PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY

Judge LEADBETTER.

The issue presented for review is whether an employer is entitled to subrogate against uninsured motorist benefits that the claimant receives under a policy of motor vehicle insurance purchased by someone other than the claimant, the employer or the tortfeasor who caused the motor vehicle accident. The Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Board) concluded that employer was entitled to sub-rogate against the funds and reversed the order of the Workers’ Compensation Judge (WCJ). The Board’s order is consistent with both the analysis set forth in recent appellate case…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Warner v. Continental/CNA Insurance CompaniesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  2. Travelers Indemnity Company of Illinois v. Joseph N. DibartoloCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1997
  3. Gardner v. Erie InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  4. Boris v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  5. Poole v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Heller v. Pennsylvania League of Cities & MunicipalitiesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
  2. Stermel v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  3. Pantelis v. Erie Insurance ExchangeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
  4. Oliver v. City of PittsburghCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
  5. Safe Auto Insurance v. School District of PhiladelphiaCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2005

9 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