Legal Opinion

Septa v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 7, 1990No. 842 C.D. 1990PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PALLADINO, Judge.

Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (Employer) appeals an order of the Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board (Board) affirming a referee’s decision that the injuries sustained by Lissa A. Scott (Claimant) were compensable because they occurred within the course and scope of her employment. We affirm.

Claimant was injured in an automobile accident which occurred while she was on her way to work. She filed a claim stating that she was disabled by the accident and that the accident occurred while she was within the course and scope of her employment as a field claims…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Peer v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  2. Magayna v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1988

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. National Casualty Co. v. KinneySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  2. Sunset Golf Course v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  3. Bensing v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  4. Berro v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  5. Bradshaw v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1994

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

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

Powered by the Exa API