Christian Petrucci

December 11, 2014 | The Legal Intelligencer

A little over a year ago, the state Supreme Court case of Payes v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Commonwealth of Pennsylvania State Police), 79 A.3d 543 (Pa. 2013), finally eased the burden, even if ever so slightly, on the injured worker attempting to prove a "mental-mental" claim for a psychiatric work injury and disability. It was hoped by the claimants' bar that the case signaled a reverse in the longstanding trend of the courts finding new and inventive ways to deny mental-mental claims. The Supreme Court essentially found that the lower tribunals had overreached in many instances.

By Christian Petrucci

6 minute read

November 13, 2014 | The Legal Intelligencer

Last month, in the case of Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Slessler), No. 2209 C.D. 2013, the Commonwealth Court took up a matter dealing with the competency of doctors testifying with respect to an impairment rating evaluation. While the procedural history and fact pattern of the case are fairly convoluted, the ultimate holding provides some guidance regarding an injured worker's ability to challenge the validity of an IRE.

By Christian Petrucci

6 minute read

October 09, 2014 | The Legal Intelligencer

While it would appear that we have dodged a bullet yet again in the current legislative session, the move to tax legal services has intensified in the last few years. Most recently, the bill made it as far as it ever has when, last month, it passed in the Pennsylvania Senate Finance Committee in bipartisan fashion, by one vote.

By Christian Petrucci

6 minute read

September 30, 2014 | The Legal Intelligencer

With the passage of Act 57 of 1996, the Pennsylvania Workers' Compensation Act was amended to provide for offsets against indemnity compensation for certain pension or severance payments as well as for "old age" Social Security payments and unemployment compensation benefits. The relevant section of the act dealing with the offsets of pension benefits is Section 204(a), which provides that "the benefits from a pension plan to the extent funded by the employer directly liable for the payment of compensation which are received by an employee shall also be credited against the amount of the" employee's disability benefits. On Sept. 10, in the matter of Stepp v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (FairPoint Communications), No. 2270 C.D. 2013, the Commonwealth Court dealt with the meaning of the phrase "the extent funded by the employer" as it pertains to a successor company in interest. Given that pension-offset situations arise in a small percentage of cases, reading Stepp will refresh the practitioner's awareness of the general principles and should provide a valuable practice tip.

By Christian Petrucci

7 minute read

August 14, 2014 | The Legal Intelligencer

Last month, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in Cruz v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Kennett Square Specialties).

By Christian Petrucci

9 minute read

July 11, 2014 | The Legal Intelligencer

While it may be hard to believe, the mandatory mediation process has been with us for almost 10 years. Act 147 of 2006, which amended the Workers' Compensation Act, originally codified the program. Given that there was initially some apprehension with the concept of making mediations mandatory, revisiting some of the concerns originally raised is warranted. It is also important to review some issues that can arise with both mandatory and voluntary mediations and recall some basic principles that will assist either type of mediation in being a success.

By Christian Petrucci

8 minute read

June 12, 2014 | The Legal Intelligencer

A little over a year ago, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued an extraordinarily significant opinion in the matter of City of Pittsburgh v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Robinson), No. 18 WAP 2011, which clarified an employer's burden in demonstrating that an employee has removed himself or herself from the workforce. This is significant since voluntary withdrawal from the workforce, or retirement, entitles an employer to a suspension of indemnity benefits. Essentially, Robinson held that in order to prove voluntary removal, the employer must establish by a "totality of the circumstances" that the injured worker has chosen not to return to the workforce.

By Christian Petrucci

6 minute read

May 09, 2014 | The Legal Intelligencer

One area of workers' compensation law that often gets overlooked is the calculation of the average weekly wage (AWW). The AWW that the employer and insurance company acknowledge on various Bureau of Workers' Compensation documents is often inaccurate. Moreover, even the corresponding compensation rate is occasionally not calculated properly, in the instances where the average weekly wage is accurate.

By Christian Petrucci

8 minute read

April 10, 2014 | The Legal Intelligencer

Two years ago, the state Superior Court decided the case of Patton v. Worthington Associates, 2012 Pa. Super 74 (March 27, 2012), which represented the most significant change to the statutory employer doctrine since the Supreme Court's seminal decision in the 1930 case of McDonald v. Levinson Steel, 153 A. 424 (Pa. 1930).

By Christian Petrucci

7 minute read

March 13, 2014 | The Legal Intelligencer

Beginning with the original Gardner decision back in 2003, one of the sections of the Workers' Compensation Act most subject to appellate court review has been Section 306(a.2), dealing with impairment rating evaluations (IREs).

By Christian Petrucci

8 minute read