In Cohen v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (City of Philadelphia), 589 Pa. 498, 909 A.2d 1261 (2006), a Philadelphia police officer, Cohen, was injured on duty, entitling him to compensation under the Workers' Compensation Act as well as full salary under Philadelphia Civil Service Regulation 32. Cohen returned to work but sometime later sought reinstatement of his benefits because of pain. The Philadelphia Civil Service Commission denied Cohen's request for Regulation 32 benefits, finding that he was recovered and able to work full time. In a subsequent workers' compensation proceeding, the WCJ found just the opposite, i.e., that he was totally disabled by his work injury, and reinstated benefits. The City appealed, contending that collateral estoppel barred the WCJ from making findings different from the Commission. The Supreme Court held that collateral estoppel did not bind the WCJ to the Commission's findings. The Court found that the Workers' Compensation Act and Regulation 32 "share an underlying humanitarian objective" in compensating persons injured at work. Cohen, 589 Pa. at 512, 909 A.2d at 1270. The Court addressed the collateral estoppel effect of an earlier Philadelphia Civil Service Commission Regulation 32 proceeding, which found that a police officer could return to a subsequently-filed reinstatement petition in the workers' compensation forum. The Civil Service Commission found that the police officer/Claimant had fully recovered from his injuries. Reversing the decision, our Supreme Court held that a workers' compensation judge was not bound by the decision of the Philadelphia Civil Service Commission, and the WCJ may conduct a separate evaluation of the evidence.