S. Connolly v. WCAB (Craft Oil Corp.)
S. Connolly v. WCAB (Craft Oil Corp.) - 1187 C.D. 2016
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | Apr 21, 2017Background
- Claimant Sean Connolly injured in an August 27, 2012 work-related motor vehicle accident while employed as a delivery truck driver; Employer accepted strains of right thumb, neck, and back and paid benefits beginning August 28, 2012.
- Claimant filed petitions seeking review of medical treatment (physical therapy, injections) and Employer filed a petition to terminate benefits alleging full recovery as of October 20, 2013.
- Employer relied on orthopedic surgeon Stanley Askin, M.D., who examined Claimant on October 15, 2013 and concluded Claimant had fully recovered from the accepted work injuries; Askin noted calf-size disparity but found no radiculopathy or MRI evidence attributing it to the work injury.
- Claimant submitted testimony and records from treating physicians (Drs. Grossinger, Wisdo, Young) and a functional evaluator (Ferder) diagnosing ongoing L5 radiculopathy and partial disability; Grossinger later opined Claimant could work part-time light duty.
- The WCJ granted Claimant’s review petitions for treatment up to October 15, 2013 but granted Employer’s termination petition effective October 15, 2013, accepting Dr. Askin’s testimony as more credible; the Board affirmed and this appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether WCJ issued a well-reasoned decision under Section 422 | Connolly: WCJ failed to explain why she credited Askin over Claimant’s experts and focused on review-petition facts | Employer: WCJ provided specific reasons (Askin’s experience, comprehensive record review, thorough exam) for crediting Askin | Held: WCJ issued a reasoned decision; she identified evidence relied upon and explained credibility findings |
| Whether termination was supported by unequivocal, competent medical evidence | Connolly: Askin’s testimony was equivocal (acknowledged calf atrophy) so termination lacks substantial evidence | Employer: Askin gave unequivocal opinion that no radiculopathy or MRI correlate existed and no work-related cause for calf disparity | Held: Termination upheld; Askin’s testimony deemed competent and not equivocal — employer met burden to show recovery |
| Whether WCJ should have expanded scope of the accepted injury beyond strains listed in the notice | Connolly: thumb injury required ligament surgery, showing the injury was more than a strain and scope should be expanded | Employer: No amendment sought before Board; WCJ relied on Askin who did not recommend scope change | Held: Issue waived (not raised before the Board); alternatively, WCJ did not err because Askin did not support reclassification |
| Whether employer met its burden to terminate benefits | Connolly: Employer failed to prove cessation of work-related disability | Employer: Presented credible medical testimony proving recovery as of Oct. 15, 2013 | Held: Employer met its burden; benefits terminated as of Oct. 15, 2013 |
Key Cases Cited
- Daniels v. Workers’ Comp. Appeal Bd. (Tristate Transp.), 828 A.2d 1043 (Pa. 2003) (WCJ must state reasons for accepting or rejecting evidence to permit meaningful appellate review)
- Galbreath v. Workmen’s Comp. Appeal Bd. (Gordon), 627 A.2d 287 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1993) (medical testimony must be unequivocal to constitute competent evidence in termination proceedings)
- Indian Creek Supply v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Anderson), 729 A.2d 157 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1999) (contradictory expert testimony recognizing possible work-related causation can render testimony equivocal)
- Westmoreland Cnty. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeal Bd. (Fuller), 942 A.2d 213 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2008) (procedures for modifying scope of a notice of compensation payable)
- McFaddin v. Workmen’s Comp. Appeal Bd. (Monongahela Valley Hosp.), 620 A.2d 709 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1993) (employer bears burden of proving cessation of disability by substantial, competent, credible medical testimony)