It has been a decade since then Governor Tom Corbett signed into the law what was called the Fair Share Act (FSA), although the Unfair Share Act may have been a more accurate name. Before the FSA, if two defendants caused your injuries, but one couldn’t afford to pay, the other defendant was responsible.… Learn more. “Pennsylvania Superior Court Decision Can Help Injured Plaintiffs Recover More”
Read MoreThe Pennsylvania Supreme Court has ruled yet again that injured workers cannot lose their wage loss benefits based on an unconstitutional Impairment Rating Evaluation (IRE). In its June 16, 2020 decision in Dana Holding Corp. v. WCAB, the Court ruled that injured workers are entitled to wage losses retroactive to the date of the IRE, provided their case was in litigation when the Court issued its landmark Protz decision declaring the IRE process unconstitutional.… Learn more. “Another Pennsylvania Supreme Court Victory for Injured Workers; Attorney Dan Siegel Authored Friend of the Court Brief”
Read MoreEmployment discrimination claims are a challenge because almost all end up in Federal Courts where the law has favored employers. That’s why when an employee wins a claim, it’s important. When an employee wins a claim in the U.S. Supreme Court, it is an even more important victory because that decision will impact every employee who subsequently files a claim.… Learn more. “Supreme Court Rules in Favor Of Workers in Age Discrimination Claims”
Read MoreThe Commonwealth Court has, in another case in which Attorneys Dan Siegel and Christa High were appeals court counsel, eliminated yet another method used by insurers and employers to prevent medical providers who treat injured workers in Pennsylvania from being paid. In the case, Workers’ First Pharmacy v. Bureau of Workers’ Compensation Fee Review Hearing Office, the Court ruled that when a provider seeks payment for treatment or services under the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act, the insurer or employer may not claim that the care was not “causally related” to the injury.… Learn more. “Another Victory for Pa. Workers’ Compensation Medical Providers”
Read MoreRecovering from an automobile accident can be difficult and painful. It is even harder if your auto insurance company requires you to go to a medical examination whenever it wants and with a doctor it selects—or risk losing your benefits. No more. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court recently ruled that insurance companies cannot mandate that insureds submit to independent medical examinations whenever the insurance company wants because these policies violate public policy (essential fairness) and are “repugnant” to the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law (MVFRL).… Learn more. “Pennsylvania Supreme Court bars insurance companies from taking away benefits from and invading the privacy rights of auto accident victims.”
Read MoreIf you get hurt walking to your job from the parking lot, you are often eligible for workers’ compensation benefits in Pennsylvania. On November 20, 2019, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court unanimously agreed that injured workers should be compensated if they are injured in a parking area—even if that parking area is optional.… Learn more. “Another Supreme Court Victory for Injured Workers (In Which Philadelphia Area Attorney Dan Siegel Was Counsel)!”
Read MoreWe all hear that voting matters. Recent events highlight why voting matters for every worker in Pennsylvania and why, if the legislature reflected the values of injured workers, this blog post might be different. Tomorrow, Pennsylvanians vote for judges, and it’s important to vote for candidates who reflect your values; your vote matters.… Learn more. “Why Voting Matters – the General Assembly and Protz”
Read MoreThe term itself sounds alien – “interlocutory.” It refers to interim court decisions that usually aren’t appealable. Yet, the Pennsylvania Appeals Court Rules permit parties to appeal from some interlocutory rulings. The rub is when and how, two considerations lawyers may not think about or understand. Today, we won a case in which the Superior Court concluded that it could decide an interlocutory appeal based on Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure 341(c).… Learn more. “Interlocutory Appeals – When is the Right Time?”
Read MoreWe practice law as a team, not as individuals who just “do their own thing” and reject the input of our colleagues. Doing so allows us to spot “holes” in arguments, improve the focus of whatever point we are trying to make, and – most importantly – win cases and get the best results for our clients.… Learn more. “Why Teamwork Matters”
Read MoreOn Tuesday, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court accepted our arguments completely and issued a landmark decision in Feliccia v. Lackawanna University, holding that (1) a university “had a duty to provide duly licensed athletic trainers for the purpose of rendering treatment to its student athletes participating in athletic events,” and (2) a Waiver of Liability is unenforceable as to claims of gross negligence and recklessness.… Learn more. “Batting 1000 – Attorney Dan Siegel is 6 for 6 in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court”
Read More
