310 A.3d 1286
Pa. Commw. Ct.2024Background
- Kathryn Lawry suffered a work-related injury in 2009, initially described as a right thumb strain, later expanded to include right ulnar collateral ligament tear and CRPS (Complex Regional Pain Syndrome).
- Multiple petitions by the County of Butler to terminate Lawry’s workers’ compensation benefits were denied by Workers’ Compensation Judge (WCJ) Steiner, who found she had not fully recovered from CRPS.
- The most recent (fourth) Termination Petition by Butler was denied by WCJ Steiner in July 2021; he found the County did not meet its burden to show full recovery from CRPS, relying on the credibility of medical evidence supporting ongoing symptoms.
- The Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board reversed WCJ Steiner, finding his rejection of Butler’s medical expert's opinion was arbitrary and capricious.
- Lawry appealed to the Commonwealth Court, arguing the Board erred in overturning the WCJ's credibility determinations and application of legal standards.
- The Commonwealth Court reviewed whether the Board overstepped in reversing the WCJ’s weighing of evidence, especially regarding CRPS diagnosis and recovery standards.
Issues
| Issue | Lawry's Argument | Butler’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Board erred by overturning the WCJ’s credibility finding on CRPS recovery. | WCJ’s credibility determination was supported; Board cannot substitute its judgment on witness credibility. | WCJ was wrong to reject Dr. Goitz’s medical opinion just because he didn’t use Budapest criteria for CRPS. | The Board erred; WCJ’s credibility finding was not arbitrary or capricious and must be respected. |
| Whether Dr. Goitz’s failure to use the “Budapest criteria” undermines the termination petition. | Dr. Goitz needed to address Budapest criteria and prove an objective change in condition. | Budapest criteria are not a legally required standard for finding recovery; WCJ arbitrarily demanded it. | Budapest criteria not legally mandated for establishing recovery; but WCJ’s reasoning as a whole was sound and not arbitrary. |
| Standard for reviewing WCJ credibility determinations under workers’ compensation law. | Only overturn if arbitrary/capricious or irrational; WCJ is primary fact-finder. | Board can reverse credibility findings if based on legal error. | Substantial deference owed to WCJ; Board overstepped in this case. |
| Whether a change in physical condition, post-prior denial, was established by the County. | County failed to show change in condition since last denial; so cannot terminate benefits. | Dr. Goitz’s opinion and surveillance video show recovery. | County failed to meet burden; benefits not terminated. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lewis v. Workers’ Comp. Appeal Bd. (Giles & Ransome, Inc.), 919 A.2d 922 (Pa. 2007) (employer must show change in claimant’s condition to terminate benefits)
- Udvari v. Workmen’s Comp. Appeal Bd. (USAir, Inc.), 705 A.2d 1290 (Pa. 1997) (WCJ determines if subjective pain complaints are credible)
- Griffiths v. Workers’ Comp. Appeal Bd. (Red Lobster), 760 A.2d 72 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2000) (WCJ is ultimate fact-finder and judges credibility)
- Casne v. Workers’ Comp. Appeal Bd. (STAT Couriers, Inc.), 962 A.2d 14 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2008) (describes deference to WCJ’s credibility determinations)