Legal Opinion

LTV Steel v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided August 18, 1998Published

1Opinion of the Court

NARICK, Senior Judge.

The issue, which is one of first impression, is whether LTV Steel (Employer) has standing to seek reimbursement under Section 306.1 of the Workers’ Compensation Act (Act),1 commonly known as the Subsequent Injury Fund (Fund). Employer seeks reimbursement for payments made to Louis Garrett (Claimant) that might have been the responsibility of the Fund if Claimant had petitioned the Fund for benefits. We conclude that Employer does not have standing to petition for reimbursement from the Fund, and the order of the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Board) is affirmed.

The…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Volterano v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  2. Pennsylvania Ass'n of Milk Dealers v. Pennsylvania Milk Marketing BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1996

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

Powered by the Exa API