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.
3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 10 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Lemansky v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Lemansky v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board Anchor | green | “a reasonable contest is established where the evidence is conflicting or subject to contrary inferences.” | 4 |
| 2 | Poli v. WORK. COMP. APPEAL BOARD | green | “the reasonableness of an employer's contest depends upon whether the contest was prompted to resolve a genuinely disputed issue or merely to harass the claimant.” | 3 |
| 3 | Capper v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board | green | “whether an employer's contest of liability is reasonable is a question of law reviewable by this court.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.