Appeal from the Order of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board in case of Eugene D. Durr v. Truck Lubricating & Washing Co., No. A-74965.
John F. Will, Jr., with him Ronald Ganassi, Will & Keisling, for petitioners.
Thomas P. Geer, for respondent, Eugene D. Durr.
Judges Mencer, Rogers and Williams, Jr., sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Williams, Jr.
[ 54 Pa. Commw. Page 496]
Truck Lubricating & Washing Company (employer) and its insurance carrier, American States Insurance Company, appeal from an order of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board (Board) that affirmed a referee's award of compensation to respondent
[ 54 Pa. Commw. Page 497]
Eugene D. Durr (claimant) for total disability, pursuant to Section 306(a) of The Pennsylvania Workmen's Compensation Act.*fn1
Durr was employed as a truck driver and truck "jockey". On March 5, 1975, he splashed acid on his left index finger while performing duties for his employer. As a result of the accident, Durr underwent the amputation of one half of the finger; and he became entitled to a healing period of six weeks and twenty-five weeks. On May 5, 1975, a Notice of Compensation Payable was issued, and was modified on July 31, 1975, to correct for the proper amount of compensation. On September 25, 1975, Durr executed a Final Receipt. However, on November 28, 1975, Durr filed a petition to set aside the Final Receipt, asserting that he was still having pain and difficulties with his left hand, due to the loss of the index finger, and that he was unable to work.*fn2
In May, 1976, it became necessary to amputate the remaining half of Durr's left index finger. Thereafter, he and the employer entered into a supplemental agreement providing for an additional six weeks healing period and another twenty-five weeks for the loss of the remaining half of the finger.
Between December, 1976, and November, 1977, hearings were held before a referee on Durr's petition to set aside the Final Receipt. On February 22, 1978, the referee granted the petition and awarded claimant Durr compensation for total disability under Section 306(a) of the Act. The referee found that the claimant suffered from neuroma pain caused by the original injury and that the pain rendered him disabled. The referee further characterized the neuroma
[ 54 Pa. Commw. Page 498]
pain as an extreme sensitivity in the central nervous system of the claimant which causes an extreme response to contact or anticipated contact, and prevents the claimant from doing his former work or any activities involving his left hand. In setting aside the Final Receipt, the referee ordered the employer to pay ...