Appeal from the Order of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board, in case of Walter Hake v. I. Reindollar & Sons, Inc., No. A-87526.
Elliot A. Strokoff, Handler, Gerber, Johnston, Strokoff & Cowden, for petitioner.
W. Jeffrey Sidebottom, Barley, Snyder, Cooper & Barber, for respondents.
Judges MacPhail and Palladino, and Senior Judge Barbieri, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Senior Judge Barbieri.
[ 101 Pa. Commw. Page 312]
Before this Court in this workmen's compensation case is an appeal by Petitioner, Walter Hake, Claimant, from an order of the Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board (Board) which dismissed a Petition for Rehearing filed by Claimant and affirmed a decision of a referee which granted the Modification Petition of I. Reindollar & Sons, Inc., Employer, reducing Claimant's benefits from those of total disability to compensation for partial disability at 50% of the total disability rate.
Claimant suffered a compensable work injury on July 7, 1981, consisting of an internal derangement of his left knee with a tear of the medial meniscus for which surgery was performed. A Notice of Compensation Payable
[ 101 Pa. Commw. Page 313]
was filed on July 24, 1981 under which payments were made until Employer filed a Modification Petition as of November 23, 1982, later amended to read as a Termination Petition to which an answer was filed. After a hearing before a referee, the decision of the referee was filed on December 20, 1983 in which he dismissed the Termination Petition, but granted modification, reducing Employer's liability to benefits for 50% partial disability. On appeal, the Board affirmed. In the meantime, however, a Petition for Rehearing was filed by Claimant on August 11, 1984, with an answer thereto filed by the Employer on August 27, 1984. It must be noted here that the hearing before the Board was held on April 4, 1984, but the decision of the Board was not filed until July 18, 1985. The Board's disposition order reads:
Claimant's appeal and Petition for Rehearing are dismissed. The Decision and Order of the Referee are hereby affirmed.
Petitioner's first contention is that the Board erred in refusing to grant Claimant's Petition ...