Case Name: COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA/DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD (HARVEY) Petition of Larry Harvey
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 2009-05-13
Citations: 601 Pa. 98
Docket Number: Appeal No. 3 EAL 2009
Parties: COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA/DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE v. WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD (HARVEY) Petition of Larry Harvey.
Judges: 
Reporter: Pennsylvania State Reports
Volume: 601
Pages: 98–99

Head Matter:
971 A.2d 1122
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA/DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE v. WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD (HARVEY) Petition of Larry Harvey.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
May 13, 2009.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
AND NOW, this 13th day May 2009, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issue, as phrased by petitioner, is:
When the evidence establishes that an employer has contributed very little, if anything, to a claimant's pension during [the] years in which the claimant was employed and participated in [a defined benefit] plan, did the Commonwealth Court err by:
(1) affirming its decisions in Pennsylvania State University/PMA Insurance Group v. WCAB (Hensal), 911 A.2d 225 (Pa.Cmwlth.2006) and Department of Public Welfare/Westem Center v. WCAB (Cato), 911 A.2d 241 (Pa.Cmwlth.2006), and holding that an employer meets its burden of proof by only presenting evidence of an actuarially assumed rate of annual return on an employer's contribution rather than evidence confirming the actual rate of return on the pension; and
(2) disregarding the plain language of Section 204(a) of the Workers' Compensation Act, 77 P.S. § 71(a), which grants an employer a credit against an employee's pension only "to the extent [the pension is] funded by the employer directly liable for the payment of workers' compensation"?