Williams v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partFriedman, Judge
I concur with the majority in its determination that Daniel Williams (Claimant) failed to preserve for our review whether Realty Service Company (Employer) filed a timely Answer to the Claim Petition. With regard to the other issues properly before this Court, I respectfully dissent.
First, the majority has decided that Employer is not estopped from denying liability after commencing payment of . compensation to Claimant following a timely Notice of Compensation Denial. In order to reach this conclusion, the majority determined that Mosgo v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board (Tri-area…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Investors Diversified Services & Travelers Insurance v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board (Howar) (Hoar)Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Giant Eagle, Inc. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
- Mosgo v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
- Boeing Vertol Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Moody v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.