Appeal from the Order of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board in case of Beatrice Josephine Baker v. Pypers, No. A-76132.
Gary A. Hurwitz, with him William D. March, Scallan, March, Berman, Del Fra & Wochok, for petitioner.
Marc S. Jacobs, Galfand, Berger, Senesky, Lurie & March, for respondent, Beatrice Josephine Baker.
Judges Blatt, MacPhail and Palladino, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Palladino. Dissenting Opinion by Judge Blatt.
[ 63 Pa. Commw. Page 415]
Pypers appeals a Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board order which affirmed an award of benefits to Beatrice Baker. We vacate and remand.
Where the party with the burden of proof has prevailed below, our scope of review is limited to a determination of whether or not there has been an error of law, a violation of constitutional rights, or the referee's findings are supported by substantial evidence. International Petroleum Service v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board, 60 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 141, 430 A.2d 1055 (1981).
The central issue before us is whether Baker was within the scope of her employment when she was injured. Eligibility for benefits under Section 301(c) of The Pennsylvania Workmen's Compensation Act,*fn1 is dependent on an injury occurring in the course of employment,
[ 63 Pa. Commw. Page 416]
which includes an injury in the furtherance of an employer's business.
The only finding of fact*fn2 made by the referee relative to this issue is:
2. Claimant worked the evening of January 13, 1977 performing her regular job responsibilities in the kitchen. By the time she left, it was approximately 1 o'clock A.M. or 1:30 A.M. -- ...