FREE CONSULTATION 412-263-0524 412-263-0524

First Post Protz IRE Decision is Helpful

First Post Protz IRE Decision is Helpful

The Commonwealth Court had offered its first interpretation of Protz v. WCAB (Derry Area School District), 161 A.3d 827 (Pa. 2017) (Protz II) in Thompson v. WCAB (Exelon Corporation) No. 1227 C.D. 2016. This decision is helpful to individuals representing claimants. Debra Thompson underwent an Impairment Rating Evaluation in October of 2005. The examining physician found an Read More

A Workers’ Late Notice of the Employer’s Uninsured Status Limits Both Medical and Wage Loss Benefits

In a recent Commonwealth Court Case, the Court held that if an injured worker fails to notify the Uninsured Employers Guaranty Fund (Fund) within 45 days after the injured worker knows that the employer does not have workers’ compensation insurance, the Fund is NOT obligated to provide “compensation” from the date of the injury, but Read More

Who Decides if a Doctor is Lying?

Recently, Abes Baumann argued a case before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court regarding credibility determinations for physicians who perform Impairment Rating Evaluations. In the case of Rhodes vs.WCAB, Tom Baumann argued that the Workers’ Compensation Judge was correct in refusing to convert the claimant’s disability benefits from total disability to partial disability. Under the Worker’s Compensation Read More

Impairment Rating Evaluations (Will Supreme Court Rule on their Fairness)

As noted in my last blog entry, many injured workers in Pennsylvania receiving Worker’s Compensation benefits are obligated to undergo an impairment rating evaluation after they have received 104 weeks of total disability benefits. When the Pennsylvania state legislature passed the changes to the Worker’s Compensation act (in 1996), it required such evaluations to be done Read More

Abnormal Working Conditions

In a recent Commonwealth Court case (PA Liquor Control Board v. WCAB (Kochanowicz), the Commonwealth Court held that experiencing an armed robbery while working in a liquor store was not a normal working condition, and the Claimant is entitled to workers’ compensation benefits for post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).  In this case, the Claimant had Read More

The Bunkhouse Rule

In Pennsylvania, “the bunkhouse rule” provides that an employee’s hours of employment are not necessarily limited to the hours actually worked. Travelling back to 1924, the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court has revived the rule. In the 1924 case, scabs were replacing striking workers. As it was impractical for the employees to obtain lodging elsewhere, they were lodged Read More

The Going and Coming Rule

Not all injuries suffered while commuting to work are exempt from Workers’ Compensation. A recent Commonwealth Court case argued by Abes Baumann  reversed the decisions of the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board and the Workers’ Compensation Judge and found that a Claimant injured on his way to work suffered a work related injury.  The Claimant was Read More