Commonwealth Court Reverses Dismissals, Holds Claim Petition Preserved Claims and Orders Remand

The Commonwealth Court reversed a decision that had dismissed multiple parties from a workers’ compensation case. The court held that the claimant’s timely Claim Petition, which named both his direct employer and potential statutory employers, tolled the statute of limitations and preserved the claims against all entities. It further ruled that the joinder petitions functioned as an amendment to the original Claim Petition due to WCAIS filing restrictions and found that dismissal of the State Workers’ Insurance Fund (SWIF) was premature, remanding the case for further proceedings and discovery.

In this case, the claimant filed a Claim Petition on May 2, 2022, alleging a May 3, 2019, work injury. In the petition, the claimant named his direct employer, Lost Forest Development, and named three other entities as statutory employers. All three of those entities were served with the Claim Petition. The claimant then filed petitions to join the other three entities on June 15, 2022. Primarily, the joinder petitions were filed to fix procedural issues involving WCAIS. The joined entities objected to the petitions as untimely, arguing the Claim Petition did not toll the statute of limitations as to them. Additionally, the insurer for the employer (SWIF) argued that it did not insure the employer as of the date of injury due to a cancellation of the employer’s policy during the coverage period.

The workers’ compensation judge dismissed SWIF from the proceedings, finding that the policy was canceled for non-payment of the premium. Further, the judge dismissed the other entities, finding the identification of them in the Claim Petition was not adequate and noting that separate Claim Petitions against them were not filed within the three-year statute of limitations. The judge also dismissed the joinder petitions as untimely.

The claimant appealed to the Appeal Board, which Board affirmed.

The claimant then appealed to the Commonwealth Court where he argued that his claims against the other entities were preserved with his initial Claim Petition, that the joinder petitions were timely, and that SWIF’s dismissal from the case was not proper.

The Commonwealth Court reversed the decisions below, holding that the Claim Petition was filed in a timely manner, and because it identified the potential statutory employers as parties, tolled the statute of limitations.

As to the joinder petitions, the court noted that they were necessary because the WCAIS system precluded answers to the Claim Petition being filed by the other entities named in it. According to the court, the joinder petitions effectively amended the Claim Petition.

The court also held that the decision to dismiss SWIF from the proceeding was premature because discovery had not yet been completed.

The court ordered the case to be remanded to the workers’ compensation judge to consider the merits of the Claim Petition, as amended by the joinder petition, and to enable the parties to complete discovery on whether SWIF’s cancellation of workers’ compensation coverage was legally effective under the policy and under the Act.