Legal Opinion

Pittsburgh Press Co. & Vigilant Insurance v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 25, 1984No. Appeal, No. 1035 C.D. 1982PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Judge Barbieri,

Pittsburgh Press Company, employer, and its insurer, Vigilant Insurance Company (Petitioners), seek review here of an order of the Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board affirming a referee’s decision reinstating workmen’s compensation benefits to Charles Pécora, Jr., for total disability. We affirm.

Principally, on this appeal, Petitioners assert that the referee and the Board erred by approving the reinstatement of benefits on the basis of a recurrence of disability where the petition filed by the Claimant was a Petition to Set Aside Final Receipt; that as a proceeding…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Woodard v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  2. Gower v. MACKESSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
  3. Cambria County Commissioners v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  4. Schneider v. Sears, Roebuck and Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
  5. Harrison v. Alden Park Manor ApartmentsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1946

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Boehm v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  2. Blue Bell Printing v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  3. Paxos v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  4. Long v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  5. North Philadelphia Aviation Center v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1988

20 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