# Oliver v. City of Pittsburgh

> Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · July 17, 2009 · 977 A.2d 1232

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9518045

## Case

- **Full name:** Casandra OLIVER v. CITY OF PITTSBURGH, Appellant
- **Court:** Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** July 17, 2009
- **Citations:** 977 A.2d 1232; 2009 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 754; 2009 WL 2060069
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Simpson
- **Judges:** Leadbetter, McGinley, Smith-Ribner, Jubelirer, Simpson, Leavitt, Butler
- **Cited by:** 7 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Red flag:** Reversed by Oliver v. City of Pittsburgh, 608 Pa. 386 (2011).
- Negative treatments: 1
- Distinguished by: 0
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9518045

## Opinion text

CONCURRING OPINION BY
Judge SIMPSON.
I concur in the thoughtful majority opinion which allows the City of Pittsburgh to assert a subrogation lien for Heart and Lung Act 1 benefits paid to Casandra Oliver. I write separately to emphasize the majority’s correct handling of City of Pittsburgh v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Williams), 810 A.2d 760 (Pa. Cmwlth.2002).
I authored the Court’s opinion in Williams. In a footnote I wrote, “Heart and Lung benefits are not subject to sub-rogation. Fulmer v. Pennsylvania State Police, 167 Pa.Cmwlth. 60 , 647 A.2d 616 (1994).” Id. at 762, n. 5. The purpose of this reference was to explain the claimant’s argument, not to judge its continued validity. The reference was not necessary to resolution of Williams, hence the relegation to a footnote. Because this reference was intended as background rather than substance, I agree that it should have no bearing in the outcome of the current case.
. The act commonly referred to as the Heart and Lung Act is the Act of June 28, 1935, P.L. 477, as amended, 53 P.S. §§ 637-638.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9518045. Public record. Not legal advice.