The Employer in Bureau of Workers' Compensation v. WCAB (Exel Logistics) sought supersedeas reimbursement when a supersedeas was denied, and the WCJ later granted suspension for refusal of reasonable medical treatment. The Commonwealth Court analyzed Section 443, and concluded supersedeas reimbursement is for change of status under Section 413 cases, and there is no such remedy in a section 306(f.1)(8) case.
The dissent suggested a common sense approach would not distinguish a Section 306(f.1)(8) forfeiture from a suspension that can be sought under Section 413. After all, the Court stated in Stuart Painting v. W.C.A.B. (Asvestas) 611 A.2d 787 (Pa. Commw. 1992) that the relief under Section 306(f.1)(8) is a suspension rather than a forfeiture.
Monday, June 09, 2003
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment