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.

WILLIAM BEAHAN v. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD (PITTSBURGH SOFTWARE CONSULTANTS (05/25/84)

decided: May 25, 1984.

WILLIAM BEAHAN, PETITIONER
v.
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD (PITTSBURGH SOFTWARE CONSULTANTS, INC.), RESPONDENTS



Appeal from the Order of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board in case of William Beahan v. Pittsburgh Software Consultants, Inc., No. A-81113.

COUNSEL

Joseph S. Hornack, Abes & Begler, P.C., for petitioner.

Francis E. Pipak, Jr., Meyer, Darragh, Buckler, Bebenek & Eck, for respondent, Pittsburgh Software Consultants, Inc.

Judges Rogers, Palladino and Barbieri, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Palladino. Dissenting Opinion by Judge Barbieri.

Author: Palladino

[ 82 Pa. Commw. Page 542]

William Beahan (Claimant) appeals from an order of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board (Board) reversing a decision of the referee and denying benefits. We affirm.

Claimant was a systems analyst for Pittsburgh Software Consultants, Inc. (Employer). He was also president of the company. On March 15, 1980, Claimant was working for a customer at another company's office, off the Employer's premises. When Claimant finished his work, he loaded his car with four of the Employer's computer discs and drove to his home. On the way home, Claimant drove directly past the building where the Employer's office was located. Claimant did not stop to drop off the discs because it was late and because he had been having trouble using his key to get into the building.

[ 82 Pa. Commw. Page 543]

Although Claimant did not intend to do any further work with the discs, he took them home with him. While carrying the discs into his home, Claimant slipped and fell on ice in his driveway, sustaining a broken right leg and a dislocated right ankle.

The referee granted benefits and the Board reversed, concluding as a matter of law that Claimant was not within the course of his employment as a systems analyst when he fell. Claimant in his appeal challenges this conclusion of the Board.*fn1

Section 301(a) of The Pennsylvania Workmen's Compensation Act (Act)*fn2 provides that an employer "shall be liable for compensation for personal injury to, or for the death of each employe, by an injury in the course of his employment."

Section 301(c)(1) of the Act defines injury to mean "an injury to an employe, regardless of previous physical condition, arising in the course of his employment and related thereto."*fn3

In Krawchuk v. Philadelphia Electric Company, 497 Pa. 115, 439 A.2d 627 (1981), the Supreme Court held that Section 301(c)(1) contains only two requirements for compensability -- (1) that the injury arose in the course of employment ...


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.