On April 28, 2008, the Commonwealth Court afforded injured workers a substantial victory in its decision, Diehl v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (IA Construction and Liberty Mutual Insurance).
The court defined what the Supreme Court meant by “traditional administrative process” in its 2005 decision Gardner v. W.C.A.B. (Genesis Health Ventures) as it relates to post-104 week Impairment Rating Evaluation cases, or IRE. As you will recall, under Gardner, an employer who fails to timely avail itself of the automatic reduction provided for in Section 306(a.2) of the Workers’ Compensation Act must seek a change in disability benefit status from total to partial through a “traditional administrative process.” If an IRE was not requested within 60 days of the expiration of 104 weeks of total disability, the sole avenue for the nonautomatic reduction was through a modification petition. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court never defined what this traditional process entailed.
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
