Christian Petrucci of the Law Offices of Christian Petrucci. What Are These 'Long-Standing and Fundamental WC Principles'?
The claimant did an excellent job of demonstrating the error in the board's opinion that had reversed her success before the WCJ in a termination petition. As the court determined that the case was "precedential" a review is warranted.
March 28, 2024 at 10:46 AM
5 minute read
In the very recent Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court case, Lawry v. County of Butler (Workers' Compensation Appeal Board), (Pa. Commw. No. 593 C.D. 2022, filed March 6, 2024), the court accepted the the claimant's articulation of the one issue before the court as "whether the board's decision violated long-standing and fundamental workers' compensation principles and, therefore, should be reversed." Given that this presentation of the issue is a bit odd and vague, but clearly of existential significance to the practice of workers' compensation, it is only natural to want to learn more. To begin with, it is not clear whether the claimant was represented by counsel before the court, as the court noted that the claimant acted pro se before both the workers' compensation judge (WCJ) and the board. Either way, the claimant did an excellent job of demonstrating the error in the board's opinion that had reversed her success before the WCJ in a termination petition. As the court determined that the case was "precedential" a review is warranted.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Dispute Over Failure to Accommodate Disability Ends in $900K Settlement
3 minute read
Judge Awards $200K in Attorney Fees Following $80K Employment Discrimination Award
4 minute read
The Moving Goalposts of Overtime Exemption: Texas Judge Invalidates 2024 Salary Threshold Rule
5 minute read
Trending Stories
- 1New York State Bar Outlines 2025 Legislative Priorities, Aiming for Fairness, Equity
- 2Family of 'Cop City' Activist Killed by Ga. Troopers Files Federal Lawsuit
- 3Houston Appeals Court Split Over Race Discrimination Suit Involving COVID-19 Vaccine Distribution
- 4‘It's Your Funeral’: On Avoiding Damaging Your Client’s Case With Uncivil Behavior
- 5Business Immigration Practices Brace for ‘Dramatic’ Changes Under Second Trump Presidency
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
