Pfeiffer v. Gibbons Brewery-Lion, Inc.

2 Citing cases

  1. SKF USA, Inc. v. W.C.A.B. (Smalls)

    728 A.2d 385 (Pa. Cmmw. Ct. 1999)   Cited 37 times
    Holding that the Board's order reversing the WCJ's denial of the claim petition and remanding for entry of an appropriate award was appealable because mere computation of benefits did not require exercise of administrative discretion

    In similar situations, we have upheld a finding of an aggravation. See, e.g., Pfeiffer v. Gibbons Brewery-Lion, Inc., 407 A.2d 1377 (Pa.Commw. 1979); Blue Bell Printing v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Bd. (Montgomery Pub. Co.), 539 A.2d 933 (Pa.Commw. 1988). AND NOW, this 17th day of February, 1999, the order of the Workers' Compensation Appeal Board in the above-captioned matter is hereby affirmed.

  2. Reliable Foods v. W.C.A.B

    660 A.2d 162 (Pa. Cmmw. Ct. 1995)   Cited 14 times
    Holding that where a claimant is receiving partial disability benefits following a return to work and, then, is totally disabled as a result of a new injury, the claimant is entitled to receive compensation for both injuries concurrently, so long as the maximum compensation payable is not exceeded

    In some cases the courts have upheld decisions relying upon evidence that the prior disability had or had not completely ceased. See Pfeiffer v. Gibbons Brewery-Lion, Inc., 47 Pa. Commw. 311, 407 A.2d 1377 (1979), affirming that the disability caused by pain in the claimant's lower back and leg after the claimant lifted himself out of a cellar window was an aggravation of a pre-existing condition, where the referee accepted a doctor's testimony that the claimant had fully recovered from prior injuries and rejected contradictory testimony; Blue Bell Printing, upholding a referee's finding that the claimant had suffered an aggravation of a pre-existing back condition, based on testimony that the claimant had fully recovered from a prior back injury and without reference to an intervening incident; Temple University v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board (Insurance Co. of North America), 138 Pa. Commw. 394, 588 A.2d 63 (1991), affirming that two subsequent exposures to chemicals merely exacerbated the claimant's symptoms and constituted a recurrence of her prior disability, where the evidence reflected that the claimant never fully recovered from the disability resulting from an initial exposure;