Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Pennsylvania opinions name it 1 courts 2002–2022 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Neidlinger v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Boardgreen2 sentences2017Neidlinger v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Quaker Alloy/CMI International), 798 A.2d 334, 338 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2002). 2017Neidlinger v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Quaker Alloy/CMI International), 798 A.2d 334, 338 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2002). | 2 | 2 |
Hawbaker v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Boardgreen1 sentence2022Appeal Bd. (Kriner’s Quality Roofing Servs.), 159 A.3d 61, 72 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2017) (explaining that the employment relationship “is a question of law” and that “[c]onclusions of law are not deemed admitted by a late answer to the claim petition”). 4 [Decedent]’s self-employment and the lack of his dependents, and statements in a Department of the Treasury Internal Revenue Service Form 1040 U.S. Individual Income Tax Return 2017 for Decedent showed deductions for a self-employment tax, indications of self-employment, and the lack of his dependents. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Rite Aid Corp. v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board
green
1 sentence2017Rite Aid, 709 A.2d at 450 . | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Yellow Freight System, Inc. v. Commonwealth
green
1 sentence2002On appeal, this Court reiterated that the timeliness of an answer is only applicable to a claim petition, not to “any other petition” such as a joinder petition: Unlike this matter involving the late answer to the petition for joinder, Yellow Freight [System, Inc. v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board, 56 Pa. Cmwlth. 1, 423 A.2d 1125 (1981)] involved the late answer to the claim petition. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
D'Errico v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board
green
1 sentence2002D’Errico v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (City of Philadelphia), 735 A.2d 161 (Pa.Cmwlth.1999). | 1 | 2002–2002 |