Cozzone v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Cozzone v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

46 A.3d 1286, 616 Pa. 162, 2012 WL 2389236, 2012 Pa. LEXIS 1409

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedJune 26, 2012

DocketNo. 91 MAL 2012

StatusPublished

This text of 46 A.3d 1286 (Cozzone v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cozzone v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board, 46 A.3d 1286, 616 Pa. 162, 2012 WL 2389236, 2012 Pa. LEXIS 1409 (Pa. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 26th day of June 2012, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issues, slightly rephrased for clarity, are:

(1) Whether the Commonwealth Court erred as a matter of law when it held that petitioner’s petition to reinstate was barred by § 413 of the Workers’ Compensation Act, 77 P.S. § 772, when he filed the petition within three (3) years from the last date of payment of compensation paid pursuant to a supplemental agreement, payments were ongoing when the petitioner filed the petition to reinstate, and East Goshen Township unilaterally ceased payments while the petition was pending?

(2) Whether the Commonwealth Court committed an error of law when it held that East Goshen Township did not violate the Act and thereby denied petitioner’s penalty petition when the Township unilaterally ceased payment of compensation on January 25, 2009 after it had entered into a supplemental agreement providing for payment of partial disability at the rate of $318.52 effective November 28, 2007 and there was no order of the WCJ or agreement of petitioner suspending payment?

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 26th day of June 2012, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issues, slightly rephrased for clarity, are:

(1) Whether the Commonwealth Court erred as a matter of law when it held that petitioner’s petition to reinstate was barred by § 413 of the Workers’ Compensation Act, 77 P.S. § 772, when he filed the petition within three (3) years from the last date of payment of compensation paid pursuant to a supplemental agreement, payments were ongoing when the petitioner filed the petition to reinstate, and East Goshen Township unilaterally ceased payments while the petition was pending?

(2) Whether the Commonwealth Court committed an error of law when it held that East Goshen Township did not violate the Act and thereby denied petitioner’s penalty petition when the Township unilaterally ceased payment of compensation on January 25, 2009 after it had entered into a supplemental agreement providing for payment of partial disability at the rate of $318.52 effective November 28, 2007 and there was no order of the WCJ or agreement of petitioner suspending payment?

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

46 A.3d 1286, 616 Pa. 162, 2012 WL 2389236, 2012 Pa. LEXIS 1409, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cozzone-v-workers-compensation-appeal-board-pa-2012.