Legal Opinion

Hastings v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 16, 1995PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FRIEDMAN, Judge.

Daniel Hastings (Claimant) appeals from an order of the Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board (Board) affirming a referee’s1 decision to deny Claimant’s Reinstatement Petition. We reverse.

Claimant was employed by Mastech Construction (Employer) as a scaffold builder when, on November 20, 1990, he sustained a work-related injury to his middle and lower back. Claimant received workers’ compensation benefits pursuant to a Notice of Compensation Payable.

Claimant was treated by Richard F. Giza, a chiropractor, who, on March 8, 1991, released Claimant to return to his full duties, but…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Pieper v. Ametek-Thermox Instruments DivisionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  2. Berks County Home v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1992

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Noverati v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  2. Warminster Fiberglass v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Jorge)Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  3. Johnson v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1997

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

Powered by the Exa API