“A Sample of Your Pro Bono Success: The Eviction Diversion Mediation Clinic” was recently published in the Dauphin County Bar Association’s February 2021 eNewsletter.
Edwards, Victoria P.
Memorandum: Employer Provided Vaccination Programs and Compensability under the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act
There is no Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court or Pennsylvania Supreme Court case law on the question of the compensability of an “injury” sustained as a result of an employer administered vaccination program, regardless of whether the program is voluntary or mandatory. However, there are several cases on point before the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board. The cases indicate that where the vaccination program is mandatory, then finding that the injury was in the course and scope of employment is basically automatic. Where the vaccine was administered by the employer through a voluntary vaccination program, the question turns on whether or not the employee was furthering the interests of the employer by voluntarily agreeing to an employer administered vaccination.
Attorneys Kathryn L. Simpson and James L. Goldsmith were named 2020 Super Lawyers. Attorney Victoria P. Edwards was also recognized as a Rising Star.
Mette, Evans & Woodside attorneys Kathryn L. Simpson, James L. Goldsmith and Michael A. Farrell were named as top attorneys in Pennsylvania by Super Lawyers. Attorney Victoria P. Edwards was also recognized by Super Lawyer as a Rising Star.
In manufacturing jobs many times employees are required to perform the same motion repeatedly or maintain certain body positions or grips, which can result in repetitive motion injuries.
Social Security Disability (SSD) is for people, who during their employment history, have amassed enough work credits by paying Social Security payroll taxes. To be considered for Social Security Disability you must be suffering from a severe condition that is expected to last at least 12 months; or result in death; or that prevents you from performing the work you did; or any other work at Substantial Gainful Activity levels.
The Court decided in Attorneys Farrell and Edward’s favor that the Workers’ Compensation Judge does not have jurisdiction to review a Utilization Review Determination where the Provider under review fails to provide medical records to the reviewer. The Court also held that denying the Claimant the right to a hearing did not violate the Claimant’s right to due process because the Claimant does not have a property interest in his future medical treatment.
News & Insights
Events & Seminars