McElheney v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Chief Justice CASTILLE.
The single issue before the Court is: when is an injured worker entitled to concurrent compensation under both the federal Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (“LHWCA”), 33 U.S.C. § 901 et seq., and the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act (“PWCA”), 77 P.S. § 1 et seq. Resolution of this issue turns on the construction of terms in the LHWCA, specifically, whether the worker was injured while performing a “traditional maritime function” and whether the situs of the injury was “upon the navigable waters of the United States.” See Wellsville Terminals…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Southern Pacific Company v. JensenSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Davis v. Department of Labor and Industries of Wash.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Western Fuel Co. v. GarciaSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- Calbeck v. Travelers Insurance Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Sun Ship, Inc. v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Vasquez Ex Rel. Bautista v. GMD Shipyard Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2009
- Uphold v. Illinois Workers' Compensation CommissionAppellate Court of Illinois · 2008
- St. Mary's Regional Medical Center v. Bath Iron WorksSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2009
- Com. v. D'Agostino, W.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
- Vasquez v. FCE Industries, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2009