Appeal from order of Court of Common Pleas of York County, May T., 1968, No. 124, in case of Earl C. Houseal v. Certain-Teed Products Corporation.
Allen H. Smith, for appellant.
Robert O. Beers, with him Anderson, Ports, May, Beers & Blakey, for appellee, submitted a brief.
Wright, P. J., Watkins, Montgomery, Jacobs, Hoffman, Spaulding, and Cercone, JJ. Dissenting Opinion by Hoffman, J.
[ 214 Pa. Super. Page 498]
Order affirmed on the opinion of the court below.
[ 214 Pa. Super. Page 499]
Dissenting Opinion by Hoffman, J.:
Appellant is a claimant under The Pennsylvania Workmen's Compensation Act.
On July 5, 1958, he suffered an accidental leg injury while employed by appellee. He was then sixty-seven years old. In 1959, following a hearing, he was awarded compensation for 50% disability. This compensation was paid until the maximum period allowed by law for such partial disability expired in 1965.*fn1
On March 17, 1966, appellant filed a petition to reinstate compensation on the ground that his original disability had become total. A hearing was held before a compensation referee where the accepted and undisputed medical testimony established that appellant's injured leg "has become 10 to 15% worse than it was at the time of the original award of 50% disability was granted. . . . [T]his is the result of the aging process and the influence of the accident on the knee of the claimant who is now 78 years of age and the influence of the aging process on the knee which was injured in the accident." Aside from his leg injury appellant would be fully capable of working to the same extent as an average healthy man of comparable years. Nonetheless, his leg injury has so incapacitated him that he is "totally disabled from doing the same work he did before the accident."
The Board concluded, however, that the aggravation of the original injury by the natural aging process did not constitute the kind of total disability that is legally compensable under the workmen's compensation laws. "[T]he claimant is not totally ...