M. Terrinoni v. WCAB (Wawa, Inc.), M. Terrinoni v. WCAB (Wawa, Inc.)

Background

Claimant (Terrinoni) injured his low back and left thigh on August 22, 2012 while working for Wawa; Employer initially accepted an acute left low back strain and later expanded to include a left thigh strain.
Claimant returned to light duty then full duty, later underwent two back surgeries (Dec 2013, Feb 2014) and stopped working; he filed a review petition seeking expansion of the accepted injury and Employer filed a termination petition alleging full recovery as of July 30, 2014.
Medical evidence conflicted: Claimant’s treating physicians and an IME attributed ongoing conditions (disc herniation, radiculopathy, piriformis, meralgia, failed back syndrome) to the work event; Employer’s orthopedic expert diagnosed only left thigh and low back strain and opined Claimant recovered.
The WCJ rejected Claimant’s live testimony (demeanor and perceived inconsistencies) and credited Employer’s orthopedist over Claimant’s medical witnesses, granting termination effective July 30, 2014 and expanding the NCP only to include a left thigh strain.
The Board affirmed the WCJ’s findings but reversed the WCJ’s award of litigation costs, concluding Claimant did not prevail on any contested issue because Employer had agreed in its answer to recognize the left thigh strain.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether WCJ’s credibility findings were capricious or unsupported	Terrinoni: WCJ’s reliance on a “scheme” of inconsistent findings and emphasis on minor documentary inconsistencies rendered credibility determinations illogical and contrary to the weight of evidence	Wawa: WCJ properly exercised factfinding, relied on demeanor and objective inconsistencies, and permissibly credited Employer’s expert	Held: WCJ’s credibility findings and reasoned decision satisfy Section 422(a); supported by record; not capricious
Whether Employer met burden to terminate benefits	Terrinoni: Medical evidence shows work event substantially contributed to later surgeries and persistent disability	Wawa: Employer produced unequivocal competent medical evidence showing full recovery from the accepted injury	Held: Employer met burden via credible orthopedist testimony; termination effective July 30, 2014
Whether NCP should be expanded beyond left thigh strain	Terrinoni: Seeks expansion to include piriformis, herniated disc, radiculopathy, failed back syndrome	Wawa: Disputes those expansions; agreed only to left thigh strain	Held: WCJ denied expansion except to add left thigh strain; Board affirmed (Employer had already agreed to left thigh strain)
Entitlement to litigation costs under Section 440(a)	Terrinoni: He prevailed in part and incurred costs deposing experts and litigating review petition; at least costs incurred before Employer’s answer should be awarded	Wawa: The left thigh strain was not contested (Employer agreed in its answer), so Claimant did not prevail on any contested issue	Held: No costs awarded — claimant did not prevail on any issue that was actually contested before the WCJ

Key Cases Cited

A & J Builders, Inc. v. Workers' Comp. Appeal Bd. (Verdi), 78 A.3d 1233 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2013) (WCJ has exclusive province over credibility and evidentiary weight)
Furnari v. Workers' Comp. Appeal Bd. (Temple Inland), 90 A.3d 53 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2014) (appellate review tests whether record contains evidence a reasonable person could accept to support WCJ findings)
Daniels v. Workers' Comp. Appeal Bd. (Tristate Transp.), 828 A.2d 1043 (Pa. 2003) (WCJ may base credibility on demeanor for live witnesses; must articulate reasons when resolving deposition testimony)
Dorsey v. Workers' Comp. Appeal Bd. (Crossing Constr. Co.), 893 A.2d 191 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2006) (WCJ must provide objective basis for preferring one expert over another when experts testify by deposition)
Leon E. Wintermyer, Inc. v. Workers' Comp. Appeal Bd. (Marlowe), 812 A.2d 478 (Pa. 2002) (capricious disregard is rare and requires deliberate baseless disregard of trustworthy evidence)
Giant Eagle, Inc. v. Workmen's Comp. Appeal Bd. (Bensy), 651 A.2d 212 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1994) (WCJ opinion may be reversed where a patchwork of inexplicable credibility findings renders decision irrational)
City of Philadelphia v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Kriebel), 29 A.3d 762 (Pa. 2011) (expert opinion based on unsubstantiated assumptions is incompetent)
Reyes v. Workers' Comp. Appeal Bd. (AMTEC), 967 A.2d 1071 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2009) (claimant must prevail on a contested issue to recover litigation costs)