Legal Opinion

Hill v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 23, 1999PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KELLEY, Judge.

The dispositive issue in this case is whether the Workers’ Compensation Judge (WCJ), in considering Bernestine Hill’s (Claimant) claim petition, erred in concluding that Claimant’s total disability changed to partial disability on the basis that suitable alternative work was made available to Claimant, which work Claimant refused. Claimant argues that the WCJ’s subsequent modification of Claimant’s benefits was error. 1 We agree, reverse the order of the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Board) to the extent that it modified Claimant’s disability status and benefits, and…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. House v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  2. Lehigh County Vo-Tech School v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  3. General Electric Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  4. Mrs. Smith's Frozen Foods Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  5. Connor v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1993

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Montgomery Hospital v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  2. Bey v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  3. Darrall v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  4. Hoover v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  5. Hill v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Ballard, Spahr, Andrews & Ingersoll)Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2003

1 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