Opinion

Young v. Workers Compensation Appeal Board

  • 909 A.2d 300
Court
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Filed
Oct 5, 2006
Status
Published
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 5th day of October 2006, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, as to the following three issues:

Did the Commonwealth Court err in imposing an award of benefits upon a decedent’s last employer and violate petitioner’s substantive due process rights when the WCJ found, based upon credible medical testimony, that the minimal exposure to asbestos during the statutory manifestation period was not a cause of the decedent’s mesothelioma?

Did the Commonwealth Court err in its interpretation of the presumption of causation found in Section 301(e) of the Workers’ Compensation Act, 77 P.S. 413, by requiring the employer to prove that a non-occupational exposure to asbestos caused the decedent’s mesothelioma?

Did the Commonwealth Court deviate from orderly judicial practices by granting a lifetime claim petition that had been abandoned earlier in the proceedings especially when the issue was not preserved on appeal?

The Motion to Correct or Modify the Record is DENIED.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.