Christian Petrucci

November 03, 2017 | The Legal Intelligencer

As the old adage goes, be careful what you wish for; you might get it. This saying is currently playing itself out in the world of Pennsylvania workers' compensation law.

By Christian Petrucci

6 minute read

August 03, 2017 | The Legal Intelligencer

As outlined in this space back in June, the nature of an ­employment relationship is a question of law that is to be determined on a ­case-by-case basis. The Commonwealth Court case of Hawbaker v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board, (Kriner's Quality Roofing Services and UEGF), 224 C.D. 2016, ­provided a springboard for discussing under what circumstances an injured worker can be considered an employee versus an independent contractor. Hawbaker also ­offered a comparison between the ­"traditional" factors in determining whether an ­employer-employee relationship exists and the ­specific statutory requirements of the 2010 Construction Workplace Misclassification Act (CWMA), which sought to codify criteria for ­classification of independent contractors in construction settings.

By Christian Petrucci

5 minute read

July 14, 2017 | The Legal Intelligencer

English philosopher, John Locke, wrote in his Second Treatise of Government in 1689 that ­legislative authority consists of the power "to make laws, and not to make legislators." Considering the Pennsylvania Supreme Court felt compelled to include this quote at the beginning of its review of Protz v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Derry Area School District), 124 A.3d 406 (Pa. Commw. 2015), it stands to reason that the court wanted to leave no doubt that the Pennsylvania General Assembly had, in fact, attempted to make legislators out of the members of the American Medical Association when the General Assembly authored Section 306(a.2) of the Workers' Compensation Act. As is well known by now, Act 57 of 1996 amended the Workers' Compensation Act in an attempt to join the wave of jurisdictions that were appealing to The American Medial Association Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairments (The AMA Guides) to limit workers' rights. The problem in Pennsylvania has been that the amendments called for reliance on "the most recent edition" of the AMA Guides in performing impairment rating evaluations (IREs). The Supreme Court has finally weighed in on the matter and found that the Pennsylvania legislature attempted to pass off to another body de facto control over matters of policy in violation of Article II Section 1 of the Pennsylvania Constitution.

By Christian Petrucci

13 minute read

June 02, 2017 | The Legal Intelligencer

Earlier this month, the Commonwealth Court issued an order reporting the previously unreported case of Hawbaker v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Kriner's Quality Roofing Services and Uninsured Employers Guaranty Fund), 224 C.D. 2016. The case offers an ­opportunity to revisit the oft-litigated issue of whether an injured worker is an employee or an independent contractor. Moreover, the case considers the ­question in light of the Construction Workplace Misclassification Act, which sets forth criteria for classification of independent ­contractors in construction settings.

By Christian Petrucci

6 minute read

May 04, 2017 | The Legal Intelligencer

The recent Commonwealth Court case of Lidey v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Tropical Amusements), 726 C.D. 2016, serves to remind the claimant's practitioner that the injured workers' average weekly wage (AWW) should be reviewed for accuracy in every case. Given the many different ways to determine an AWW, the employer and insurance company often make both simple and complex errors in the wage that gets ­acknowledged on various bureau documents.

By Christian Petrucci

12 minute read

April 13, 2017 | The Legal Intelligencer

Another year and another workers' compensation insurance rate cut. For the third year in a row under the Wolf administration, and the sixth ­overall, there will be a significant rate cut in workers' compensation insurance, while the system maintains benefit levels for people injured on the job.

By Christian Petrucci

11 minute read

February 09, 2017 | The Legal Intelligencer

With every passing month, the elephant in the room that goes by the name Protz v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Derry Area School District) grows bigger while the Commonwealth and Supreme courts continue to churn out case after case dealing with impairment rating evaluations (IREs) under Section 306(a.2) of the Workers' Compensation Act.

By Christian Petrucci

11 minute read

January 06, 2017 | The Legal Intelligencer

As discussed in this space on ­various occasions, the Commonwealth Court's decision in Protz v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Derry Area School District), 124 A.3d 406 (Pa. Commw. 2015), which has since been taken up by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, addressed the constitutionality of Section 306(a.2) of the Workers' Compensation Act, which calls for reliance on "the most recent edition" of The American Medial Association Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairments (the AMA guides) in performing Impairment Rating Evaluation (IREs). The court found that the legislature's deference to "the most recent version" of the AMA guides was an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority to the AMA with no vehicle for legislative review.

By Christian Petrucci

12 minute read

December 05, 2016 | The Legal Intelligencer

Last month, the Commonwealth Court took the action of reporting a previously unreported decision from August of this year in the matter of Justus v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Bay Valley Foods), 1556 C.D. 2015. The case addresses a very fact specific fatal claim, which provides some guidance as to the burden of proof in such a petition, and what is considered substantial competent evidence in such cases.

By Christian Petrucci

9 minute read

November 03, 2016 | The Legal Intelligencer

As is well known, an employer's right to subrogation under Section 319 of the Workers' Compensation Act has consistently been found to be ­absolute, with few exceptions. The most notable example being where the injured worker recovers from an uninsured motorist policy paid for by the employee himself. There is, however, another exception that can be missed, which was recently addressed in the Commonwealth Court case of Pennsylvania State Police v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Bushta), No. 2426 C.D. 2015.

By Christian Petrucci

10 minute read