City of Philadelphia v. WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD

4 A.3d 154, 607 Pa. 96, 2010 Pa. LEXIS 2083
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in City of Philadelphia v. WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD. Read the opinion of the Court — 612 Pa. 6
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided September 9, 2010·No. 691 EAL 2009·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 9th day of September, 2010, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the following issue:

Whether the Commonwealth Court’s decision to reverse the decision of the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board and reinstate the decision of the Workers’ Compensation Judge is supported by substantial competent evidence, given (1) the rebuttable statutory presumption, under Section 801(e) of the Workers’ Compensation Act, that Decedent’s occupational disease, i.e., hepatitis C, arose out of and in the course of his employment as a firefighter; and (2) the absence of any evidence establishing that Decedent was an intravenous drug user, shared needles, and/or came in contact with contaminated needles.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

City of Philadelphia v. WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD, 4 A.3d 154, 607 Pa. 96, 2010 Pa. LEXIS 2083 (Pa. 2010).

4 A.3d 154 (City of Philadelphia v. WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.