48 Pa. Commw. 51 - Simpson v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently April 2010
7 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board v. Olivetti Corp. of America · General Tire & Rubber Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board · Steinle v. Commonwealth
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The petitioner was eligible to receive holiday pay for July 5, 1982, because he met the initial criteria of having completed a probationary period of employment and of having seniority rights. The collective agreement additionally required that to be eligible for holiday pay, the employee must perform work within the qualifying work week, a condition which the petitioner did not satisfy. However, the collective bargaining agreement contained the following double condition which the petitioner met: However, an employees failure to perform work within such ‘qualifying work-week’ shall be excused for this purpose if due to one of the following reasons: (1) A personal injury out of and in the course of employment with the Company, provided such injury has not caused the employee to be absent from work for more than thirty (30) calendar days prior to the holiday. The petitioner was eligible because his failure to work during the qualifying work-week was due to an injury in the course of his employment and because he worked on June 6, 1982 a day within thirty days prior to July 5, 1982.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[Wjhether or not [Blue Cross and Blue Shield] payments may be credited against an employer’s workmen’s compensation obligations ‘depends not on whether the payments are categorized as a benefit of a collective bargaining agreement, but rather whether the payments were made as wages for work performed or in relief of the employee’s incapacity to labor.’ Steinle v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board, 38 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 241, 246 , 393 A.2d 503 , 506 (1978). The criterion, then, for allowing a credit is whether the claimant would be required to 'deplete benefits . . . which could have been used for other purposes.’ [Olivetti, 26 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. at 470 , 364 A.2d at 738 ]. Here, petitioner was not required to deplete benefits that would have been otherwise due him or which could have been used for other purposes. Thus, the employer is entitled to the credit.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[H]ere [the claimant] failed to provide any evidence that his bills were paid by a private insurance plan for which he paid premiums. Furthermore, the Board found as a fact that BC & BS coverage was provided by the employer, a finding which was supported by the record. A further distinguishing factor is that, in General Tire, the group health benefits received by claimant were for [illnesses] which did not result from an injury in the course of his employment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.