Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

REGENT BOTTLING COMPANY AND HOME INSURANCE CO. v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD AND JOHN B. REESE (09/11/73)

decided: September 11, 1973.

REGENT BOTTLING COMPANY AND HOME INSURANCE CO., INSURANCE CARRIER, APPELLANTS,
v.
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD AND JOHN B. REESE, FATHER OF JOHN M. REESE, DECEASED



Appeal from the Order of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board in case of John B. Reese, father of John M., deceased v. Regent Bottling Company and Home Insurance Company, Insurance Carrier, No. A-65955.

COUNSEL

Raymond F. Keisling, with him Will & Keisling, for appellants.

P. Christian Hague, with him Meyer, Unkovic & Scott, for appellees.

Judges Crumlish, Jr., Kramer and Blatt, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Crumlish, Jr.

Author: Crumlish

[ 10 Pa. Commw. Page 10]

John M. Reese, age 21, was fatally injured on May 25, 1971 as a result of an accident suffered by him in the course of his employment with Regent Bottling Company. John B. Reese, father of deceased, filed a Fatal Claim Petition for Compensation by Dependents of Deceased Employe alleging that he was partially dependent on the deceased and entitled to the benefits as provided for in Section 307 of The Pennsylvania Workmen's Compensation Act, Act of June 2, 1915, P.L. 736, as amended, 77 P.S. 561. The Referee denied John B. Reese compensation because "the claimant failed to establish by sufficient credible evidence that he was dependent upon the deceased son through whom he claims compensation benefits." The Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board (Board) reversed the decision of the Referee and granted the claimant benefits based on partial dependency.

Employer-Appellant appeals this decision to this Court.

Appellant argues that the Board erred in its determination that the Appellee was partially dependent on his deceased son for income to run Appellee's household. Appellant also contends that since there was competent evidence to support the Referee's finding of no actual dependence between Appellee and his deceased son, the Board exceeded its authority in reversing this finding without taking additional testimony.

We agree with Appellant and reverse the decision of the Board.

Our scope of review in cases such as this is limited to a determination as to whether or not constitutional rights were violated, an error of law was committed, or any necessary finding of fact was not supported by substantial evidence. Arnold Coal & Supply Co., Inc. v. Markle, 8 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 107, 300 A.2d 916

[ 10 Pa. Commw. Page 11]

(1973); Bayuk Cigar Company v. Hawn, 8 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 45, 300 A.2d 837 (1973).

Section 307 of The Pennsylvania Workmen's Compensation Act, Act of June 2, 1915, P.L. 736, as amended, 77 P.S. ยง 561(5) provides that in the absence of a surviving spouse or children entitled to workmen's compensation benefits, compensation shall be paid to a surviving mother or father of the deceased employee if that parent ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.