Pennsylvania: Court Refuses to Apply Extraterritorial Jurisdiction for Injury Occurring in New Jersey

Where Pennsylvania and New Jersey were joint owners of a bridge crossing the Delaware River between Philadelphia and Camden and claimant, a Pennsylvania resident hired by a subcontractor to perform painting and lead abatement services on the bridge and adjoining property, sustained work-related injuries while standing on the ground in New Jersey, the Pennsylvania Workers' Compensation Appeal Board did not err in affirming the decision that his claim fell outside the jurisdiction of the state’s Workers' Compensation Act. Acknowledging that claimant had worked on both the Pennsylvania and New Jersey sides of the bridge, the court noted also that claimant had filed for and received workers’ compensation benefits under the New Jersey Act. The court also acknowledged a “catch-all” provision under which the Pennsylvania Act could apply “extraterritorially” as provided by section 305.2 of the Act. The court stressed, however, that the General Assembly intended that provision to operate as an exception to the general rule that the Act only applied to injuries occurring within the Commonwealth if a claimant meant one of four prerequisites. Claimant admitted that he did not meet any of them. Had claimant not recovered New Jersey benefits, the matter would have been different, indicated the court.

Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the Feature National Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter, is co-author of Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law (LexisNexis).

LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance.

See Kreschollek v. Workers' Comp. Appeal Bd., 2019 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 53 (Jan. 7, 2019)

See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 143.06.

Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law