Legal Opinion

City of Philadelphia v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 19, 2011No. 49 EAP 2010PublishedCited by 62 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

Justice ORIE MELVIN.

We granted review to determine whether an opinion rendered by a medical expert is sufficient to rebut the presumption of disease causation under the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act (“Act”), 77 P.S. §§ 1-1041.4; 2501-2626. For the reasons that follow, we hold that an expert’s opinion does not constitute substantial competent evidence where it is based on a series of assumptions that lack the necessary factual predicate. Since the medical opinion in the instant case is based upon unfounded supposition, it is legally insuffi cient to overcome the presumption of…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Lewis v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  2. Collins v. HandSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
  3. Commonwealth v. ThomasSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
  4. Pawlosky v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  5. Casne v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2008

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

3Cited by62 opinions

  1. City of Pittsburgh v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  2. Cruz v. Workers Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  3. Com. v. Sami, N.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2020
  4. City of Williamsport v. Workers' Comp. Appeal Bd.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
  5. Com. v. Sami, N.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2020

57 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