¶1 ORDER
¶2 AND NOW, this 19th day of April, 2011, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue, as stated by Petitioner, is:
Did the Superior Court, in a decision of first impression and of statewide substantial significance, disregard the public policy of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the plain meaning of the Penna [sic] Workers [sic] Compensation Act when it decided that a third party release in the form of a “Worker’s Comp Disclaimer” signed in consideration for employment and receipt of compensation benefits, which further required the waiver and eternal release any [sic] *8 and all rights to make a claim, commence a lawsuit, or recover damages or losses is not void against public policy when the language of the Disclaimer openly conflicts with the language of section 204(a) of the Pennsylvania Workers [sic] Compensation Act which expressly renders such agreements as void against public policy?