Appeal from the Order of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board in case of Patricia A. Bock v. Edison Hotel and Westmoreland Casualty Company, Insurance Carrier, No. A-66247.
Theodore E. Breault, with him Egler, McGregor & Reinstadtler, for appellant.
Thomas Levendos, with him George Shorall, for appellee.
Judges Crumlish, Jr., Mencer and Blatt, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Crumlish, Jr.
[ 11 Pa. Commw. Page 102]
A "semi-interpretative dancer"*fn1 was stripped of Workmen's Compensation Benefits by the Referee and the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board (Board) reversed, resulting in the instant Appeal.
Patricia Bock (Claimant) was employed by the Edison Hotel (Hotel) to entertain the public in what she described in her professional parlance as "semi-interpretative dancing." On January 13, 1971, while doing her last number, Claimant avers that she slipped on the stage and twisted her right ankle, saving herself from a fall by virtue of an alert grasp of the curtain behind. She contends that the pain grew progressively worse, gyrating to her right side, right arm and lower back.
On May 24, 1971, Claimant, seeking redress for her injuries, filed a Claim Petition for Compensation Disability. After the hearing, the Referee dismissed the Petition by concluding that she had failed to carry the burden, which required her to establish a compensable accident under the Pennsylvania Workmen's Compensation Act, Act of June 2, 1915, P.L. 736, 77 P.S. § 1 et seq. (Act). The Board reversed the Referee.
Hotel has brought this decision to us.
[ 11 Pa. Commw. Page 103]
Our scope of review in this type of case is limited to a determination of whether or not constitutional rights were violated, an error of law was committed, or any necessary finding of fact was unsupported by substantial evidence. Arnold Coal & Supply Co., Inc. v. Markle, 8 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 107, 300 A.2d 916 (1973); Bayuk Cigar Company v. Hawn, 8 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 45, 300 A.2d 837 (1973).
However, again this Court is confronted with the difficulties posed in the interpretation and application of our decision in Universal Cyclops Steel Corporation v. Krawczynski, 9 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 176, 305 A.2d 757 (1973), to an appeal in which the Referee's decision and Board's reversal predated the filing, but not the application of this important decision.*fn2 In Universal Cyclops Steel Corporation v. Krawczynski, 9 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 176, 305 A.2d 757 (1973), this Court, through Judge Blatt, concluded that 1972 amendments*fn3 to the Workmen's Compensation Act vested greater authority in the Referee, making the Referee the ultimate fact finder. So, unless new evidence is heard by the Board, its review is limited to the competence, and not ...