Opinion

Croll v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board

  • 511 Pa. 79
  • 511 A.2d 1311
  • 1986 Pa. LEXIS 807
Court
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Filed
Jun 20, 1986
Status
Published
Author
Zappala
On the bench
Zappala, Hutchinson, Nix, Larsen, Flaherty, McDermott, Papadakos
Cited by
5 cases

The opinion

ZAPPALA, Justice,

concurring.

While I join in the majority opinion, I am compelled to write separately to clarify the review powers of the Board. Under Section 423 of the Act, 77 P.S. § 854, “... the board may disregard the findings of fact of the referee if not supported by competent evidence and if it deem proper may hear other evidence, ....” (emphasis added). Since the Board may hear “other evidence”, it logically follows that the Board may appoint an impartial expert to give evidence regarding a relevant issue. Accordingly, under the facts of this case, I see no error in the action of the Board in remanding the matter to a new referee and appointing an impartial expert.

NIX, C.J., and McDERMOTT, J., join in this concurring opinion.

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.