Palaschak v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board
2012 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 34
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | 2012Background
- Claimant sustained a neck injury in 1992 as a U.S. Airways mechanic and returned to work in a modified role with no wage loss, suspending total disability benefits in 1996.
- From 1996 to 2006 Claimant continued in light/bench work; in March 2006 his doctor restricted him to bench work and Employer could not accommodate the restriction, placing him on unpaid leave in 2006.
- On April 21, 2006 Claimant filed reinstatement and modification petitions, contending a March 2006 restriction caused loss of earning power; Employer denied and argued petitions were time-barred.
- WCJ denied reinstatement/modification, concluding no new injury in 2006 and that petitions were time-barred because filed more than 500 weeks after suspension.
- Board affirmed; Claimant sought review contending 500-week limit did not apply due to light-duty employment; the issue focused on 413(a)’s 500-week repose and suspension language.
- Majority held: reinstatement petition filed more than 500 weeks after suspension is time-barred when benefits were suspended for earning power equal to or greater than pre-injury wages.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether reinstatement petition was timely under 413(a) | Palaschak argues suspension allows later reinstatement within 500 weeks. | US Airways argues petition filed after 500 weeks is barred by 413(a). | Petition time-barred; affirmed. |
| Whether light-duty employment tolls or creates a different deadline | Light-duty compensation should allow a three-year period similar to partial disability cases. | Statute uses 500-week limit after suspension; light-duty does not toll the period. | No toll; light-duty does not extend the period; still time-barred. |
Key Cases Cited
- Edgewater Steel Co. v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Beers), 719 A.2d 812 (Pa.Cmwlth.1998) (final 500-week rule applied to suspension scenarios)
- Stewart v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Pa. Glass Sand/US Silica), 562 Pa. 401 (2000) (criticized 500-week distinctions; held plain language controls; three-year period discussed)
- Roussos v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board (St. Vincent Health Center), 157 Pa.Cmwlth. 584 (1993) (suspension requires timely reinstatement within 500 weeks)
- Deppenbrook v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board (Republic Steel Corporation), 655 A.2d 1072 (Pa.Cmwlth.1995) (time-barred reinstatement after suspension analyzed)
- Cicchiello v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Frank L. Markel Corporation), 761 A.2d 210 (Pa.Cmwlth.2000) (500-week limit described as statute of repose extinguishing right to benefits)
- O'Brien v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (Montefiore Hospital), 690 A.2d 1262 (Pa.Cmwlth.1997) (medical payments not treated as compensation tolling timing)
- Bellows v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board (Shabloski), 663 A.2d 267 (Pa.Cmwlth.1995) (liberal period to seek reinstatement; not extended by every circumstance)