Numerous legal issues arise when employees are injured while commuting to work. In National Casualty Co. v. Kinney, the Superior Court (on April 25, 2014) addressed the issue of ridesharing. In particular, the Court held that an employee is not within the course and scope of his or her employment when commuting…
Read MoreIn the long-awaited decision in Barrick v. Holy Spirit Hospital, an evenly-divided Supreme Court today held that communication between counsel and an expert are privileged material pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 4003.3 and 4003.5. In so ruling, the three Justices supporting affirmance noted that "Rule 4003.3 balances the general rule of expansive discovery with…
Read MoreWant to know what the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has ruled on any given day? Or what else is happening in the Pennsylvania courts? If you do, you may think that the best way to do so is to visit the Court's website every day. Guess what, that may not be the best…
Read MoreOne of the issues that periodically rears its head in claims under the Pennsylvania Workers' Compensation Act is whether there exists such a concept as a de facto Notice of Compensation Payable (NCP). This is an important concept because an NCP provides an injured worker with certain rights, and we…
Read MoreAs we reported, in an earlier decision, the Commonwealth Court refused to countenance the delaying tactics and other excuses so common when the Uninsured Employers Guaranty Fund is a party in proceedings under the Pennsylvania Workers' Compensation Act. On April 7, 2014, in Pa. Uninsured Employers Guaranty Fund v. WCAB,…
Read MoreOur latest appellate newsletter, highlighting March 2014 published decisions from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, Pennsylvania Superior Court, Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court, U.S. Supreme Court and Florida Supreme Court is now available. Just click here to read the latest case law on civil procedure (read the Pa. & U.S. Supreme court opinions),…
Read MoreThe Superior Court has shed light on an issue that, while seemingly clear, remained in question -- whether Pennsylvania motor vehicle insurance carriers providing coverage for commercial fleets of vehicles were required to offer uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage and, if so, whether policyholders were required to accept or reject…
Read MoreTwo recent decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court and the Florida Supreme Court may have a significant impact on Pennsylvania cases. In Daimler AG v. Bauman, No 11-965 (January 14, 2014), the U.S. Supreme Court stepped into the murky waters of jurisdiction, with a decision that will almost certainly limit…
Read MoreIn Cordes v. Assocs. of Internal Medicine, a divided Superior Court affirmed that jurors may be struck for cause for various reasons, including: First, indirect relationships of a juror to a party with which the juror has had no direct contact, including connections through spouses with a potential (also indirect)…
Read MoreIn Verizon v. WCAB (Ketterer), the Commonwealth Court ruled that a physician must have an active clinical practice, i.e., the physician must provide preventive care and the evaluation, treatment and management of medical conditions, at least 20 hours per week, in order to be qualified to perform Impairment Rating Evaluation…
Read More
