506 A.2d 537 | Pa. Commw. Ct. | 1986
Opinion by
The City of Clairton (Clairton) and the Westmoreland Casualty Company (Westmoreland), who will also be jointly referenced herein as the petitioners, petition for review of the order of the Workmens Compensation Appeal Board (Board) affirming the decision of a referee awarding benefits to Robert L. Cantrell (claimant). The benefits asyarded were for total disability, beginning September 16, 1975, with a suspension of benefits from November 16, 1975 to November 6, 1976. The referee also, dismissed the Rockwood Insurance Company (Rockwood) from liability for benefits awarded.
The claimant, a Clairton police officer, answered a call on July 3, 1975 concerning a large man who had collapsed at his home. After lifting the stricken man into a bed, the claimant ran to his car for an oxygen tank,.
During the periods when the claimant was absent from work between July 3, 1975 and September 16, 1975, he utilized his paid sick leave. Between September 16, 1975 and November 16, 1975, however, he received no salary or benefits.
He continued to work at his desk assignment until November 6, 1976, when he was assaulted, while on duty, by an intoxicated person who pulled him over a desk, fighting and wrestling with him. After this incident, the claimant immediately experienced weakness and felt feint. His supervisor advised him to go home due to his condition and he has not worked since that day. The next day he was hospitalized and had a cardiac catheterization. He later had a triple bypass operation. On May 14, 1977, he sustained multiple cardiac arrests and again was hospitalized for twenty-one days.
The petitioners initially contend that the medical evidence presented by the claimant is not unequivocal and so does not establish the causal connection between his disability and his employment.
Contrary to these assertions, however, our review of Dr. Walrath’s testimony leads us to conclude that, taken as a whole, his testimony was sufficiently unequivocal to support the referee’s finding for the claimant. Haney v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board, 65 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 461, 442 A.2d 1223 (1982). Moreover, we. read the testimony, which was offered subsequent to the passage upon which the petitioners rely, as merely explaining or clarifying an apparent ambiguity. We, therefore, do not believe that the petitioners’ challenge to the Board’s adjudication can be sustained on this basis.
Next, Westmoreland contends that the compensation authorities erred in assessing against it the total liability for the claimant’s benefits. Westmoreland argues that, because the referee found that the occurrences of July 3, 1975, July 7, 1975 and November 6, 1976 all
Accordingly, we will affirm the order of the Board.
Order
And Now, this 27th day of March, 1986, the order of the Workmens Compensation Appeal Board in the above-captioned matter is affirmed.
The burden is on the claimant to prove that his heart attack arose in the course of his employment and that it was related there
Westmoreland was the workmens compensation insurance carrier for Clairton until January 5, 1976, when Clairton transferred its coverage to Rockwood.
The referees sixteenth finding is as follows:
That Your Referee finds as a feet that Claimant was totally disabled from the injury of July 3, 1975 from September 16, 1975 to November 16, 1975 and from November 6,
1976 to the present date and shall remain so indefinitely into the future.