Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Toy v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 15, 1994Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partSilvestri, Senior Judge

Although I concur in the majority’s conclusion that Claimant was entitled to a penalty on the amount of monies miscalculated by Employer in determining its credit for the payment of sickness/accident benefits and the majority’s affirmance of the Board’s dis-allowance of attorney’s fees for unreasonable contest, I disagree with the majority’s conclusion that Employer waived its right to a credit for payments it made to Claimant *704prior to a determination of liability on the claim petition because Employer failed to raise the matter of a credit before the referee; accordingly, I dissent from that…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Jones v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1982

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

Powered by the Exa API