McGregor Architectural Iron Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board

535 A.2d 1241, 112 Pa. Commw. 601, 1988 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 58
CourtCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedJanuary 20, 1988
DocketAppeal, No. 2257 C. D. 1986
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 535 A.2d 1241 (McGregor Architectural Iron Co. 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.

Bluebook
McGregor Architectural Iron Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board, 535 A.2d 1241, 112 Pa. Commw. 601, 1988 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 58 (Pa. Ct. App. 1988).

Opinion

Opinion by

Senior Judge Barbieri,

McGregor Architectural Iron Company, Employer, appeals here an order of the Workmens Compensation Appeal Board (Board) which affirmed a referees dismissal of a Modification Petition filed by Employer. We reverse.

The issue before us is a very simple one. Claimant, Robert Roach, was seriously injured on October 4, 1983 when he fell twenty-five feet while at work. Employer, in support of its Modification Petition, presented evi[603]*603dence of job opportunities which were all deemed by the referee to be not acceptable and, therefore, not “available” to Claimant, Kachinski v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board (Vepco Construction Co.), 516 Pa. 240, 532 A.2d 374 (1987), except for a part-time job the referee found Claimant could perform, but which would pay only $60.30 per week. Since the Claimant’s pre-injury wage was $643.70, and the receipt by Claimant of $60.30 per week would not reduce payment to him of the full amount previously payable for total disability,1 there being thus no change in the weekly compensation rate,2 the referee dismissed Employer’s Modification Petition. On appeal the Board affirmed.

Defendant’s sole contention on this appeal is that it is entitled to the reduction of disability status from total to partial, regardless of whether this changes the dollars payable by it, since changing the Claimant’s basis for [604]*604payments from those required by The Pennsylvania Workmens Compensation Act (Act),3 from Section 306(a) to Section 306(b),4 changes the maximum period for payments, reducing the liability time for partial disability5 payments to 500 weeks. We must agree.

Since there is no question that Claimant is partially disabled, he is subject to the time limitation in Section 306(b), which contains the following provision:

For disability partial in character . . . sixty-six and two-thirds per centum of the difference between the wages of the injured employe, . . . and the earning power of the employe thereafter; but such compensation . . . shall be paid during the period of such partial disability . . . but for not more than 500 weeks. (Emphasis added.)

Accordingly, we will reverse and remand on our holding that the Employer is entitled to an order reducing Employers liability from total to partial. We need not order the application of 500 weeks’ limitation, since it is statutory and thus automatic so long as Claimant’s disability status does not change.6

Order

Now, January 20, 1988, the order of the Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board as of No. A-91049, dated July 3, 1986, is hereby reversed and the case is remand[605]*605ed for the entry of an Order reducing Employers liability from total to partial with no change in the weekly amount of compensation, subject, however, to any future change that may be required by changes in circumstances agreed upon or ruled according to law.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Pittsburgh Steelers Sports, Inc. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board
604 A.2d 319 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
535 A.2d 1241, 112 Pa. Commw. 601, 1988 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 58, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcgregor-architectural-iron-co-v-workmens-compensation-appeal-board-pacommwct-1988.