 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Bucci v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board8/23/2000
usually is symmetrical. (Deposition N.T., 12-12-96, pp. 10, 19-22).
In reviewing Dr. Busis' testimony, we note that had he based his medical opinion that Claimant's hearing loss was not work related solely upon the effects of aging, or "presbycusis," a form of hearing loss due to wear and tear or deterioration within the ear, it would be questionable in light of our Supreme Court's recent decision in LTV Steel Co. v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Mozena), _____ Pa. _____, ______ A.2d ______ (No. 0082 W.D. App. Dkt. 1999, filed July 19, 2000).
In Mozena, the Supreme Court stated that:
Courts must have reliable means for distinguishing the effects of presbycusis from the effects of long-term exposure to occupational noise. Neither LTV nor USX has shown how the Act can both accomplish its humanitarian objective and permit a reduction in liability based on indiscriminate information.... There is no reliable scientific (controlled) means of quantifying how aging impairs the hearing of a given individual. Whereas, the effect of many other nonoccupational factors is quantifiable. Courts have reduced an employer's responsibility for benefits where it established that a nonwork-related cause was the substantial contributing factor of hearing impairment.... Where the nonoccupational causes of a specific individual's hearing impairment is quantifiable using the AMA Guides, either side may present evidence of the percentage of loss. Id., slip op. at 15, 17, and 18.
In the matter before us, Dr. Busis definitively testified that Claimant exhibited marked asymmetry in his hearing loss problem, and that such asymmetry is rarely found in occupational-caused hearing impairments. The WCJ found Dr. Busis' testimony more credible than that of Claimant's expert witness, and as this Court has consistently reaffirmed, "the WCJ is the sole arbiter of questions of credibility and may accept or reject the testimony of any witness in whole or in part." General Electric Co. v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Rizzo), 737 A.2d 852, 855 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1999).
Accordingly, on the basis of the foregoing, the order of the Board is affirmed.
ORDER
AND NOW, this 23 rd day of August 2000, the order of the Workers' Compensation Appeal Board in the above-captioned matter is affirmed.
JAMES GARDNER COLINS, JUDGE
Page 1 2 3 Pennsylvania Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|