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.

ROBERT BRODBECK v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD (PRESTON TRUCKING COMPANY) (08/16/83)

decided: August 16, 1983.

ROBERT BRODBECK, PETITIONER
v.
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD (PRESTON TRUCKING COMPANY), RESPONDENTS



Appeal from the Order of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board in case of Robert Brodbeck v. Preston Trucking Co., No. A-80796.

COUNSEL

Carl M. Mazzocone, with him Christina J. Barbieri, Kates, Livesey & Mazzocone, P.C., for petitioner.

Patrice Anne Toland, LaBrum and Doak, for respondent, Preston Trucking Company.

Judges Rogers, Craig and MacPhail, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Craig.

Author: Craig

[ 76 Pa. Commw. Page 373]

Claimant Robert Brodbeck appeals an order of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board, which affirmed

[ 76 Pa. Commw. Page 374]

    a referee's determination to grant a modification petition filed by the claimant's former employer, Preston Trucking Company. On the principal issue, substantiality of the evidence,*fn1 we affirm, but remand for additional determinations.

While employed by Preston as a platform worker, the claimant, on September 19, 1976, sustained a disabling injury to his neck, for which he collected compensation benefits at the weekly rate of $187. On July 27, 1978, Preston filed a petition to terminate compensation based on Dr. Henry Shaenkin's "Physician's Affidavit of Full Recovery," issued after his examination of the claimant on July 14, 1978. The filing of

[ 76 Pa. Commw. Page 375]

    that petition, which Preston subsequently amended to a petition to modify, automatically invoked a supersedeas on benefits under section 413 of The Pennsylvania Workmen's Compensation Act.*fn2

Following hearings at which four physicians testified as to the claimant's physical and psychiatric status, and a psychologist testified as to the availability of jobs suitable for the claimant, the referee granted Preston's modification petition on the basis of findings that:

7. [T]he claimant's psychiatric status does not prevent him from engaging in his former occupation as a platform worker and that in addition, the claimant could perform sedentary work under his present ...


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.