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.

LOCKHART IRON AND STEEL CO. v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD AND WILLIAM J. WHITE (01/09/75)

decided: January 9, 1975.

LOCKHART IRON AND STEEL CO., APPELLANT
v.
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD AND WILLIAM J. WHITE, JR., APPELLEES



Appeal from the Order of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board in case of William J. White, Jr. v. Lockhart Iron & Steel Corp., No. A-67049.

COUNSEL

George I. Minch, with him Wright & Rundle, for appellant.

Alan N. Bloch, with him Flaherty and Bloch, and James N. Diefenderfer, for appellees.

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

Author: Mencer

[ 17 Pa. Commw. Page 2]

This is an appeal by the Lockhart Iron and Steel Company (appellant) from a decision of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board (Board) affirming a referee's award of compensation benefits to William J. White, Jr. (White).

White, aged seventeen years, was employed as a laborer by the appellant. On August 4, 1972, while in the course of his employment, White was involved in an accident in which the tip of the second finger of his right hand was amputated. He applied for compensation benefits, and these were awarded by a referee after a hearing. The Board then affirmed the referee's award and this appeal followed.

Our scope of review in workmen's compensation cases in which the claimant has prevailed below is limited to a determination of whether constitutional rights were violated, an error of law was committed, or any necessary finding of fact was not supported by substantial evidence. Regent Bottling Company v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board, 10 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 8, 309 A.2d 265 (1973). Appellant shows his awareness of our narrow scope of review by arguing as his sole basis for appeal that the referee and Board erred as a matter of law in granting compensation to White.

The applicable provision of the law involved in this case is Section 306(c)(15) of The Pennsylvania Workmen's

[ 17 Pa. Commw. Page 3]

Compensation Act.*fn1 This provision reads as follows:

"For all disability resulting from permanent injuries of the following classes, the compensation shall be exclusively as follows:

"(15) The loss of any substantial part of the first phalange of a finger, or an amputation immediately below the first phalange for the purpose of providing an optimum surgical result, shall be considered loss of one-half of the finger. Any greater loss ...


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.