In a significant win for a small local employer, the PENNSYLVANIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD affirmed the denial of a Claim Petition.  The Board concurred with the Workers' Compensation Judge that the Claimant was not injured during the course & scope of his employment.

The Claimant filed a Petition alleging that he sustained injuries on February 17, 2022, when he was struck by a vehicle in Center City, Philadelphia.  After parking his car, the Claimant was walking to a job site when he was hit by a truck resulting in multiple upper body injuries.  The carrier issued a NOTICE OF COMPENSATION DENIAL on the basis that the injury occurred outside of the course & scope of employment.

Employer and its carrier were represented by Joseph Frattone, Esq., a partner in the firm's Philadelphia office.  To save the client money, by avoiding fully litigating the case to conclusion before receiving a ruling on the legal issue of course & scope of employment, Attorney Frattone requested a bifurcation of the legal issue from the medical issues.  Judge Beach granted the MOTION TO BIFURCATE and, after hearing testimony from the Claimant, she agreed that the Claim Petition should be denied because the Claimant was not in the course & scope of his employment at the time of the accident, which then rendered moot the need to present medical testimony.  The Judge based her Decision largely upon questions answered during Attorney Frattone's cross-examination of Claimant.

On appeal, the Board found that Claimant was neither engaged in the furtherance of his employer‘s business at the time of injury, nor was he injured on a premises occupied or under the control of the employer.  Furthermore, Claimant was not on a premises where the employer’s business or affairs were being carried out; he was not required by the nature of his employment to be present there; and the injuries were not caused by a condition of the premises or the operation of the employer’s business thereon.  The Board reiterated the importance of the Claimant’s answers offered on cross-examination by Attorney Frattone.  Specifically, the Board pointed to the testimony where Claimant admitted that he was made aware of a parking garage where he could park, but he was not required to do so.

The ruling by the Appeal Board represents a significant victory as the Claimant would have been entitled to a maximum compensation rate of $1,205.00 a week.  Furthermore, his injuries generated significant medical bills for which the employer and its carrier would have been liable.

If you have any questions about this case or any other workers’ compensation matter, please contact Joseph Frattone, Esq. at jfrattone@c-wlaw.com or (610) 567-0700.