Opinion
Argued November 3, 1978
January 24, 1979.
Workmen's compensation — Remand — Appealable order — Specific findings of fact — Purpose other than delay.
1. An order of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board remanding a case to a referee is interlocutory and ordinarily unappealable. [83-4]
2. A remand by the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board for additional findings of fact, which are arguably relevant to the legal issues involved, is in aid of proper appellate review, serves a purpose other than delay and is unappealable, as remand is the appropriate remedy when the referee who is responsible for making such findings fails to make findings of sufficient specificity to permit proper appellate review. [84-5]
Argued November 3, 1978, before Judges MENCER, DiSALLE and CRAIG, sitting as a panel of three.
Appeal, No. 1562 C.D. 1978, from the Order of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board in case of Curtis M. Buchan v. Royal Pizza House, Inc., No. A-73740.
Petition with the Department of Labor and Industry for disability benefits. Petition denied. Petitioner appealed to the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board. Benefits awarded. Employer and insurer appealed to the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. Case remanded. ( 28 Pa. Commw. 121) Board remanded case to referee. Petition dismissed. Petitioner appealed to the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board. Case remanded. Employer and insurer appealed to the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. Held: Appeal quashed.
George H. Thompson, with him Hirsch, Weise Tillman, for petitioners.
James W. Bruce, with him Caruthers Bruce, for respondents.
Royal Pizza House, Inc. (employer) and its workmen's compensation insurance carrier have appealed from an order of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board which remanded this case to a referee for the purpose of making findings of fact which are, in the opinion of the Board, crucial to determining whether or not Curtis M. Buchan (claimant) was injured in the course of his employment. We quash the appeal.
This case was previously before us, at which time we remanded the case so that the referee could make crucial findings of fact concerning the nature of the employer's business. Buchan v. Royal Pizza House, Inc., 28 Pa. Commw. 121, 367 A.2d 824 (1977). Although the referee did make some additional findings, they were not sufficient, in the opinion of the Board, to resolve the course-of-employment issue. Our earlier opinion strongly suggests that the Board acted properly in again remanding the case to the referee.
Remand orders are interlocutory in nature, and appeals therefrom must therefore be quashed unless they fall within the exceptions established in Riley Stoker Corp. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board, 9 Pa. Commw. 533, 308 A.2d 205 (1973), or United Metal Fabricators, Inc. v. Zindash, 8 Pa. Commw. 339, 301 A.2d 708 (1973). See, e.g., Norato v. Tasty Cake Baking Co., 27 Pa. Commw. 309, 366 A.2d 1290 (1976). At oral argument, the employer's counsel admitted that this appeal is not specifically covered by either of these exceptions but argued that to allow this appeal would be a logical extension of Zindash. We do not agree.
In Zindash, the Board ordered a rehearing, although no conclusion other than that of the referee could be supported. Since a rehearing would therefore have served no purpose except delay, this Court allowed the appeal. In this case, the remand was not for a rehearing but for the making of additional findings of fact. Review by the Board, by this Court, and by the Supreme Court is absolutely dependent upon findings of fact which are sufficiently detailed to allow application of the proper legal principles. See, e.g., Page's Department Store v. Velardi, 464 Pa. 276, 346 A.2d 556 (1975); Buchan v. Royal Pizza House, Inc., supra note 1. The referee is the one who is initially responsible for making such findings and, where he has failed to do so, the correct and indeed only remedy is to remand. Buchan v. Royal Pizza House, Inc., supra note 1; Section 419 of The Pennsylvania Workmen's Compensation Act, Act of June 2, 1915, P.L. 736, as amended, 77 P. S. § 852.
The employer's argument that the Board is usurping the referee's fact-finding power is without merit. The Board simply pointed out several factual issues which the referee had not addressed; it did not suggest how the referee should resolve these factual issues.
We need not decide whether or not all of the findings requested by the Board are essential; it is sufficient that many of them are at least arguably relevant to the legal issues involved. Since detailed findings of fact will aid appellate review of these legal issues, a purpose other than delay will be served and the rationale of Zindash cannot be extended to allow an appeal in this case.
ORDER
AND NOW, this 24th day of January, 1979, the appeal of Royal Pizza House, Inc., and Old Republic Companies is hereby quashed.