Kane v. Borough of Collingdale

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Kane v. Borough of Collingdale

478 A.2d 554, 84 Pa. Commw. 233, 1984 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 1604

CourtCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedJuly 30, 1984

DocketAppeal, No. 2393 C.D. 1982

StatusPublished

This text of 478 A.2d 554 (Kane v. Borough of Collingdale) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kane v. Borough of Collingdale, 478 A.2d 554, 84 Pa. Commw. 233, 1984 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 1604 (Pa. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Judge Palladino,

The Borough of Collingdale (Appellant) appeals from a final decision of the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County which held that the police disability pension of Michael Kane (Appellee) was not to be reduced by the amount of his workmen’s compensation benefits.

Appellant argues that the governing collective bargaining agreement does not permit a police officer suffering a service-connected disability to receive full disability pension benefits in addition to workmen’s compensation. The issue presented in this case is one of contract interpretation.

[234]*234After a careful review of the record and applicable law, we affirm on the basis of the able and comprehensive opinion of Judge Labrum of the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County, Michael P. Kane v. Borough of Collingdale, et al., 29 Pa. D. & C. 3d 668 (1982).

Order

And Now, July 30, 1984, the opinion and order of the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County at No. 80-6379 is affirmed.

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