Giant Eagle, Inc. v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

I have several differences with the lead Justices’ reasoning regarding the meaning of “compensation,” as used in Section 314(a) of the Workers’ Compensation Act.1 First, to the extent that the lead opinion proceeds under a plain language interpretation of the statute, see, e.g., Opinion Announcing the Judgment of the Court (“OAJC”), at 297 (asserting that the determination is derived from, inter alia, exploring Section 314(a)’s “plain language”), that position is undermined by its assertion that the provision is ambiguous. See, e.g., id. at 294 (“Because there are at least two valid…