explaining that "[ajgencies must look beyond the similarities between the issues, evaluate the policies behind the acts, and apply estoppel only where the issues are identical and the actions promote similar policies and rights.”
How later courts described this case
- explaining that "[ajgencies must look beyond the similarities between the issues, evaluate the policies behind the acts, and apply estoppel only where the issues are identical and the actions promote similar policies and rights.”
- holding that decisions of unemployment compensation referees are not binding in workers’ compensation proceedings
- unemployment compensation referee’s factual determination that hospital worker was not abused by patient did not preclude later workmen’s compensation action to decide whether worker was injured in the course of employment because the polices and procedures of the two legal schemes *651 were not similar
- unemployment compensation referee's factual findings that hospital worker was not abused by patient did not preclude later workmen's compensation proceeding regarding whether worker was injured in the course of employment because the policies and procedures of the two legal schemes were not similar
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
DOYLE, Judge,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent for the reasons already expressed in my dissenting opinion in Bortz v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board (Reznor Division of FL Industries), 656 A.2d 554 (Pa.Cmwlth.1995) (Doyle, J., dissenting).
SMITH, J., joins in this dissent.