Badaracco v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Bd.

• Decision Date: 07 January 1980
• Citation: 48 Pa.Cmwlth. 321,409 A.2d 529
• Parties: George J. BADARACCO, Jr., Petitioner, v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD and Keystone Foods, Respondents.
• Court: Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court

Page 529

409 A.2d 529

48 Pa.Cmwlth. 321

George J. BADARACCO, Jr., Petitioner, v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD and Keystone Foods, Respondents.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania.

Argued Dec. 4, 1979.

Decided Jan. 7, 1980.

[48 Pa.Cmwlth. 322] Harry K. Thomas, Knox, Graham, McLaughlin, Gornall & Sennett, Inc., Erie, for petitioner.

James P. Lay, III, Erie, for respondents.

Before WILKINSON, BLATT and CRAIG, JJ.

OPINION

WILKINSON, Judge.

Petitioner (claimant) appeals from an order of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board (Board) reversing the referee's award of benefits for total disability from December 15, 1975, through March 7, 1976. The referee had found that the disability was causally related to an injury which claimant suffered while in the course of his employment with respondent company on April 5, 1974. ¹

The facts are as follows: On April 5, 1974, the claimant twisted his knee while pulling cases of merchandise at work. He received immediate medical attention from the plant physician and returned to work with no lost time. Claimant worked at respondent company until November 1975 when he was laid off and was immediately employed by a moving and storage company. Claimant alleged and the referee found that, during this period of time, the claimant's knee would "pop out" of joint but that he was able to put it back into place himself.

On December 15, 1975, 20 months after the injury, claimant bent over while at home to pick up an item and experienced great pain in his knee. He sought medical treatment from an orthopedic surgeon, who hospitalized the claimant and continued to treat him until March 8, 1976, when claimant was discharged to return to work.

Upon claimant's subsequent application for benefits for his period of disability, a hearing was held at which the referee heard the claimant's testimony and read the reports of the treating orthopedic surgeon then found the claimant's recent disability to be causally related to the injury suffered while in the course of employment with respondent company in April 1974. He ordered compensation for total disability from December 15, 1975 through March 7, 1976. The respondent company appealed to the Board, alleging that the referee's finding was not supported by competent evidence in that the medical evidence stated only that there was a "possibility" that the claimant's condition was due to an injury at work. The Board reversed the referee, stating that the claimant's medical testimony failed to prove a causal relationship between the earlier injury and the alleged disability. Claimant appealed to this Court.

The claimant argues that a referee may decide a case without unequivocal medical testimony where the causal connection between the injury and disability is so natural and probable that an expert witness is not necessary. The respondent company, while recognizing situations in which a cause and effect relationship is so obvious and direct that unequivocal testimony is unnecessary, argues that here the causal relationship is not apparent for several reasons. Specifically, the work-related injury was not so severe as to cause the claimant to lose any time from work, the claimant had no intervening medical treatment during a 20-month period which elapsed between the injury and the present disability, and the treating physician stated that although there...