Cooper v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board9/29/2005
In these consolidated appeals, Florence Cooper (Claimant) and Leeds and Northrup (Employer) petition for review of an order of the Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Board) which affirmed a remanded decision and order of a Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ). The WCJ's order, pursuant to the Pennsylvania Workers' Compensation Act (Act), granted temporary partial and temporary total benefits to Claimant for closed periods, and further suspended Claimant's benefits as of February 1, 1996. We affirm.
On March 29, 1995 Claimant filed a Claim Petition alleging that she had sustained a repetitive trauma injury to her right hand and wrist in the course and scope of her work for Employer. In her Petition, Claimant alleged two dates of injury, March 12 and April 1, 1992. Employer filed an Answer thereto, asserting, inter alia, that Claimant's Petition was untimely and barred by the Act's statute of repose. Hearings before WCJ John W. Liddy ensued. By decision and order dated June 27, 1997, WCJ Liddy denied Claimant's Petition, concluding in relevant part that Claimant had failed to provide Employer with timely notice of the injury.
Claimant appealed to the Board, which, by order dated October 7, 1998, vacated portions of WCJ Liddy's decision and order, including the Finding that Claimant's injury had occurred some time before March 15, 1992, and further vacating the Conclusion based thereon that the Petition was untimely. The Board remanded the matter back to the WCJ. Employer appealed the Board's order to this Court, which quashed the appeal and remanded the matter to the WCJ by order dated June 22, 1999.
WCJ Liddy thereafter issued a remand decision and order dated February 25, 2002, granting Claimant's Petition and suspending her benefits. On remand, WCJ Liddy found that Claimant sustained a work-related injury on March 23, 1992, and provided timely notice thereof, but was able to perform her work duties and thus not entitled to compensation. Claimant appealed to the Board.
By order and decision dated February 25, 2003, the Board reversed in part, affirmed in part, and again remanded the case. The Board concluded, in relevant part, that Claimant was entitled to benefits on the basis that she had returned to work under restrictions, and had sustained a resultant loss of wages. The Board again remanded the matter to the WCJ for the issuance of appropriate Findings and Conclusions regarding the specific periods in which Claimant was entitled to benefits.
Following the Board's second remand, WCJ Wayne L. Dietrich issued a decision and order dated January 21, 2004, awarding temporary total and partial disability benefits for periods through February 1, 1996. Further, WCJ Dietrich suspended Claimant's benefits as of February 1, 1996, based upon his finding that Claimant had voluntarily retired from the work force for financial support and hospitalization reasons, but not due to her work-related injury. Claimant again appealed to the Board.
In her appeal to the Board, Claimant argued that WCJ Dietrich erred in finding that Claimant's retirement was a voluntary removal from the work force. Upon examination of the record, the Board concluded that Claimant's own testimony before the WCJ supported the voluntary retirement Finding, and accordingly affirmed by order and decision dated November 16, 2004. Claimant petitioned this Court for review of the Board's order, and Employer subsequently cross-petitioned for review. The parties' cross appeals were sua sponte consolidated by order of this Court dated January 6, 2005.
This Court's scope of review is limited to determining whether there has been a violation of constitutional rights, e
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Pennsylvania Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|