In February, the Commonwealth Court reported the decision in Barrett v. W.C.A.B (Vision Quest National), which had previously been unreported, continuing what seems to be a troubling trend of reporting otherwise dormant decisions that are decidedly unfavorable to the Claimant’s Bar.
This latest case deals with the Notice of Temporary Compensation Payable, or NTCP, which has always been the subject of much controversy. Leaving aside the usual issues regarding the appropriateness of filing the document and the ease with which it can be revoked, it is important to be aware of Section 406.1 of the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act, 77 P.S. § 717.1, and in particular, the circumstances under which a NTCP converts automatically to an actual Notice of Compensation Payable, or NCP. Therefore, Barrett is not broadly significant because of its holding, but because of the light it sheds on the NTCP process.
This content has been archived.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]
