Skip to main content

Mark Felder v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services and Pepco

DCAugust 7, 2014No. 12-AA-1773Cited 1 time
Defendant WinPepco
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
McLeese, Pryor, King
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Wage Theft

Outcome

The court affirmed the Compensation Review Board's decision that short-term disability payments made by the employer constitute advance payments of compensation under D.C. Code § 32-1515(j), entitling the employer to a credit against future workers' compensation disability benefits.

What This Ruling Means

# Felder v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services and Pepco **What Happened** Mark Felder filed a wage theft claim against his employer, Pepco, related to disability payments and workers' compensation benefits. The dispute centered on whether short-term disability payments Pepco provided should count as advance payments toward Felder's workers' compensation benefits. **What the Court Decided** The court sided with Pepco. It ruled that short-term disability payments the company made to Felder did count as advance payments under D.C. law. This means Pepco could reduce the amount of future workers' compensation disability benefits Felder would receive by the amount already paid through short-term disability. **Why This Matters for Workers** This ruling affects how workers receive disability benefits after an injury. When an employer provides short-term disability payments, those amounts may be deducted from longer-term workers' compensation benefits rather than given as additional payments. Workers should understand that receiving disability payments from their employer doesn't necessarily mean they'll receive the full amount of workers' compensation benefits on top of that—there may be credits applied against what they're owed.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse more:Wage Theft cases

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.