Penn. WCJ Did Exemplary Job of Explaining Reasoning

A Pennsylvania appellate court disagreed with the city of Philadelphia's assertion that a workers' compensation judge didn't articulate the reasons underlying her credibility determinations, thereby providing for adequate appellate review in accordance with section 422(a) of the Workers' Compensation Act.In fact, the Commonwealth Court said the WCJ did an exemplary job of explaining why she accepted the medical testimony of the expert for a firefighter over the testimony of the city's doctor. Philadelphia was seeking to have the WCJ's order overturned, thus allowing the...