Legal Opinion

Teamsters Local 384 v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 30, 1990No. 2261 C.D. 1988PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CRAIG, Judge.

Where an employee of a union has suffered an injury in the union’s service, resulting in a residual disability which continues to limit his earning capacity, can the employer-union, by virtue of a membership vote excluding him from the union job, have his worker compensation benefits terminated without showing the availability of other work within his capabilities?

The controlling rule as to termination of benefits is that the employer must prove availability of work within the capacity of the injured employee. Judge Colins has reiterated that rule for this court as follows:

An…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Kachinski v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  2. Barrett v. Otis Elevator Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
  3. Farquhar v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  4. Petrone v. Moffat Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
  5. Scobbie v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1988

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Trimmer v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  2. Williams v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1991

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

Powered by the Exa API