Workers' Comp Injuries Due to a Condition of the Premises of Operation of the Business
There are several cases where the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court has reviewed the facts and determined that an injury was caused by a condition of the premises.
November 08, 2024 at 11:00 AM
6 minute read
Special SectionsSection 301(c)(1) of the Pennsylvania Workers' Compensation Act provides that there are two situations where an injury can be considered in the course of employment. The first is where an employee is actually engaged in the furtherance of the employer's business, whether on or off the premises. In the second situation, an employee who is engaged in work at the time of the injury can nonetheless be entitled to compensation where the employee: is on the premises under the control of the employer; is required by the nature of their employment to be on such premises; and sustains an injury or injuries due to a condition of the premises or operation of the business.
There are several cases where the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court has reviewed the facts and determined that an injury was caused by a condition of the premises. In Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (Slaugenhaupt) v. United States Steel, 376 A.2d 271 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1977), the Commonwealth Court dealt with a claimant who suffered an epileptic seizure and crashed his car into a concrete barrier on the employer's premises. The court found that while the seizure caused the accident, the claimant's fatal injuries resulted from the force of the car striking the concrete barrier that was a condition of the premises that contributed to the claimant's death.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 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 AllPa. Supreme Court to Decide Enforceability of 'Browsewrap' Arbitration Agreements
8 minute readFrom a Mediator’s Perspective: Common Mis-steps That Parties Make at Mediation
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Cleary Nabs Public Company Advisory Practice Head From Orrick in San Francisco
- 2New York Environmental Legislation in 2024
- 3Cravath Hires Paul Weiss Antitrust Co-Chair
- 4Contract Technology Provider LegalOn Launches AI-powered Playbook Tool
- 5Court of Appeals Provides Comfort to Land Use Litigants Through the Relation Back Doctrine
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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