Opinion
Argued June 4, 1979
September 28, 1979.
Workmen's compensation — Disability — Loss of earning capacity — The Pennsylvania Workmen's Compensation Act, Act 1915, June 2, P.L. 736.
1. Disability benefits under The Pennsylvania Workmen's Compensation Act, Act 1915, June 2, P.L. 736, are properly denied an injured employe when substantial evidence supports a determination that no loss of earning capacity was sustained and that there are no employment which the employe cannot perform. [255-6]
Argued June 4, 1979, before Judges CRUMLISH, JR., BLATT and DiSALLE, sitting as a panel of three.
Appeal, No. 2105 C.D. 1978, from the Order of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board in case of William Michael Skilton v. Enders Food Market, Inc.
Petition with the Department of Labor and Industry for disability benefits. Petition denied. Petitioner appealed to the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board. Denial affirmed. Petitioner appealed to the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. Held: Affirmed.
John H. Broujos, with him Broujos and Andrews, for petitioner.
DeLano M. Lantz, with him David E. Lehman, and McNees, Wallace Nurick, for respondent.
William M. Skilton (petitioner) appeals from an order of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board (Board) which denied him benefits after concluding that although the petitioner suffered an "injury" as defined by The Pennsylvania Workmen's Compensation Act (Act), he failed to establish any loss of earning capacity or any disability resulting therefrom.
Section 301(c) of the Act of June 2, 1915, P.L. 736, as amended, 77 P. S. § 411.
The petitioner suffers from a disease known as "cutis marmorata," a condition where the hands become mottled and red upon exposure to cold, and he voluntarily terminated his part-time employment at Ender's Food Market (Enders) in December 1974. He was a high school student at the time of this employment and the job required his handling of frozen items and occasionally required him to enter a freezer. He did not seek medical attention until March 1976 when his disease was diagnosed as indicated. At the time of the hearing he was earning substantially more than he had been earning when employed by Enders.
In view of the fact that the petitioner presented no testimony as to wages lost by him or as to duties which he cannot now perform, we are of the opinion that he does not now suffer from a compensable disability and that the decision of the referee as affirmed by the Board is supported by substantial evidence.
The order of the Board is affirmed.
ORDER
AND NOW, this 28th day of September, 1979, the order of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board dismissing the petition of William M. Skilton is affirmed.