Legal Opinion

Crown Services, Inc. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 18, 1996Published

1Dissent · FriedmanFriedman, Judge

Because I believe that the majority opinion advocates a crystal ball standard for employers where notice is concerned, I respectfully dissent. Indeed, I fully agree with the dissenting opinion, written by Judge Kelley, that the notice of the work accident of May 13, 1987, and the resulting injury to Claimant’s hand, was insufficient under sections 311 and 312 of the Workers’ Compensation Act (Act)1 to inform Employer of an injury Claimant might have received to his lower back as a result of that same incident. However, I write separately because I believe that our current caselaw already…

Also in this document: Dissent · Kelley.

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. E.J.T. Construction., Inc. v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  2. Pennsylvania Mines Corporation/Greenwich Collieries v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  3. Bolitch v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  4. City of Philadelphia v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  5. Chapley v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1994

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

Powered by the Exa API