Publications
Superior Court grants motion to dismiss claimant’s pro se appeal as untimely and finds the Board’s decision dismissing claimant’s petition based on the two-year statute of limitations was based on substantial evidence and contained no errors of law.
The claimant alleged she was injured at a work event on July 25, 2017, while at a meeting, during which she got upset, had trouble speaking and developed a headache.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers.
Calculation of average weekly wage not always limited to money paid in 13-week period prior to work accident, but can include monies (bonus) earned during that period but is not received until later date outside that period.
The claimant worked as an executive assistant for the City of Aventura. After sustaining a compensable work accident on February 27, 2020, she continued to work and received an annual merit bonus on August 6, 2020.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers.
New Jersey Supreme Court finds that the petitioner was entitled to workers’ compensation benefits in applying the premises rule.
The New Jersey Supreme Court reversed the Appellate Division’s decision which had found the petitioner’s injuries did not arise out of and in the course of employment.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers.
While the Workers’ Compensation Act is to be construed liberally, coverage cannot be found if there is a clear disregard of the statutory requirement.
The Appellate Division reversed the workers’ compensation court’s orders denying E.W. Millwork’s motion to dismiss and for reconsideration. On August 27, 2003, the petitioner was injured while working for E.W. Millwork.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers.
Injury sustained by the claimant on his way to take a cigarette break and get a sandwich was compensable under the “personal comfort” doctrine.
The claimant, who was the recipient of Social Security Disability (SSD) benefits due to a mental health condition, worked in a part-time capacity for an employer that found jobs for individuals on SSD seeking supplemental income.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers.
Commonwealth Court holds that the Section 319 subrogation provision of the Act is absolute and does not violate constitutionally protected rights in contravention of the Pennsylvania Constitution.
In this case, the claimant sustained a work injury in April of 2016 when struck by a motor vehicle while performing road work. The employer paid the claimant benefits under a Notice of Compensation Payable.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers.
What's Hot in Workers' Comp - News and Results*
NEWS
RESULTS*
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers.
In a case of first impression, the Board finds that numerous medical bills were paid properly in accordance with the Fee Schedule and rejects claimant’s argument that the Collateral Source Rule should apply.
This case came before the Board on August 24, 2021, on a remand order from the Superior Court.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers.
First District Court of Appeals affirms that attorney’s fees are not required to be awarded pursuant to Rule 60Q-6.120 when a motion for summary final order is denied.
The claimant sustained a work injury on July 8, 2020, and filed petitions for benefits against the employer and their employee leasing company.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers.
First District Court of Appeals affirms the judge’s decision, finding that the judge had the authority to interpret the meaning of the stipulation and the interpretation was binding on the parties.
The claimant sustained a compensable accident on December 28, 2013, when he was involved in a motor vehicle accident as a firefighter, which resulted in an injury to his back.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers.