6 Pennsylvania opinions name it 1 courts 2019–2025 5 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Pennsylvania courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
City of Phila. v. Workers' Comp. Appeal Bd.green2 sentences2025The general causation requirement “weeds out claims for compensation for cancers with no known link to Group 1 carcinogens.” Id. 2023The general causation requirement serves a gatekeeping function: it recognizes “that different types of cancers have different etiologies[,] and it weeds out claims for compensation for cancers with no known link to Group 1 carcinogens.” Id. | 1 | 3 |
Bristol Borough v. Workers' Comp. Appeal Bd.green2 sentences2025In Bristol Borough v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Burnett), 206 A.3d 585 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2019) (en banc), when faced with the identical argument 4 that Section 301(f) of the Act requires that a volunteer firefighter use only PennFIRS documentation to establish direct exposure to a Group 1 carcinogen, this Court explained: In reviewing the language of Section 301(f) [of the Act], [this Court] recognize[s] that it imposes the same general causation requirement on both career and voluntary firefighters to establish “direct exposure to a carcinogen referred to in [S]ection 108(r) [of the Act] 2023Appeal Bd. (Burnett), 206 A.3d 585, 601 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2019) (en banc). 4 the examination failed to reveal any evidence of the condition of cancer. | 1 | 2 |
Demchenko v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Boardgreen1 sentence2021See Demchenko, 149 A.3d at 419 - 20 (noting that the burden under Section 108(n) relies on “‘general causation’ principles”). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.