Dombrowski v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board
This text of 461 A.2d 648 (Dombrowski v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Opinion by
Marla P. Dombrowski (claimant) appeals an order of the Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board (Board) which affirmed the referee’s denial of specific loss benefits for her alleged complete loss of hearing to her right ear due to a work-related fall.
Section 306(c) and (d) of The Pennsylvania Workmen’s Compensation Act1 2provides specific loss benefits for “complete loss of hearing in one ear.” And our Supreme Court has held that complete loss of hearing occurs when the loss is complete for all intents and purposes. Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board v. Hartlieb, 465 Pa. 249, 348 A.2d 746 (1975). Here, when asked if the claimant had experienced a complete loss of hearing for all intents and purposes, her own medical expert testified “no, it is a partial loss.” Because this testimony clearly supports the finding that the claimant has not suffered a “complete” loss of hearing,? we will affirm the order of the Board.
Obdeb.
A ktt> Now, this 24th day of June, 1983, the order of the Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board in the above-captioned matter is hereby affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
461 A.2d 648, 75 Pa. Commw. 190, 1983 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 1731, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dombrowski-v-workmens-compensation-appeal-board-pacommwct-1983.