Legal Opinion
Pieper v. Ametek-Thermox Instruments Division
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided December 27, 1990No. 41 W.D. Appeal Dkt. 1989PublishedCited by 217 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CAPPY, Justice.
The question before us is whether the Commonwealth Court committed an error of law by requiring Appellant to establish a “causal connection” between his prior work-related injury and his present disability in order to qualify for reinstatement of compensation pursuant to The Pennsylvania Workmen’s Compensation Act. 1 Because the record evidence fails to establish a termination of the liability of Appellant’s employer we find that Appellant was only required, as he did, to establish that his disability “continued”. We therefore reverse the decision of the Commonwealth…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Estate of McGovern v. Commonwealth, State Employees' Retirement BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
- Russell v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
- Farquhar v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Odgers v. Com., Unemp. Comp. Bd. of Rev.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Busche v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by217 opinions
- Udvari v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
- Phoenixville Hospital v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
- Republic Steel Corp. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
- Dillon v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
- Whitfield v. Workers' Comp. Appeal Bd.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
212 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.