Opinion

Jones v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

  • 164 A.3d 542
  • 2017 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 324
  • 2017 WL 1174924
Court
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
Filed
Mar 30, 2017
Status
Published
Author
Pellegrini
On the bench
Cohn, Dan, Hearthway, Honorable, Jubelirer, Julia, Pellegrini, Renee
Cited by
2 cases
Authority
More cited than 49.5%

The opinion

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Terri Jones, :

Petitioner :

:

v. : No. 1531 C.D. 2016

: Submitted: March 10, 2017

Workers’ Compensation Appeal :

Board (Villanova University), :

Respondent :

BEFORE: HONORABLE RENÉE COHN JUBELIRER, Judge

HONORABLE JULIA K. HEARTHWAY, Judge

HONORABLE DAN PELLEGRINI, Senior Judge

OPINION NOT REPORTED

MEMORANDUM OPINION BY

SENIOR JUDGE PELLEGRINI FILED: March 30, 2017

Terri Jones (Claimant) petitions for review of the Workers’

Compensation Appeal Board’s (Board) order affirming the Workers’

Compensation Judge’s (WCJ) denial of a claim petition she filed against Villanova

University (Employer or University) for injuries purportedly work-related. The

only issue in this appeal is whether the Notice of Stopping Temporary

Compensation (NSTC) was sent by Employer within five days after the last

payment of temporary compensation. For the reasons below, we affirm.

I.

Claimant worked as a patrol officer for Employer. On the evening of

January 27, 2012, Claimant was stationed at the University’s West Gate to ensure

that vehicles desiring to enter the campus had permission to do so. When a vehicle

approached the West Gate without displaying the necessary credentials, Claimant

stopped the vehicle and informed the driver that he was not allowed on campus.

Nonetheless, the driver drove through and continued onto University property.

Soon after, the vehicle approached the West Gate attempting to exit. Claimant

stepped in front of the vehicle to speak with the driver, at which point the vehicle

bumped into Claimant twice, striking both of her knees. Claimant informed

Employer of the incident on February 7, 2012, but continued to work until May 15,

2012, when she claimed she could no longer perform her duties because of the pain

in her knees.

Because it was uncertain whether her injuries were compensable, on

June 6, 2012, Employer issued a Notice of Temporary Compensation Payable

(NTCP) as provided for in Section 406.1(d)(1) of the Workers’ Compensation Act

(Act).1 Two days later, on June 8, 2012, Claimant filed a claim petition. On June

1

Section 406.1(d)(1) of the Act of June 2, 1915, P.L. 736, added by the Act of February

8, 1972, P.L. 25, as amended, 77 P.S. § 717.1(d)(1), provides:

In any instance where an employer is uncertain whether a claim is

compensable under this act or is uncertain of the extent of its

liability under this act, the employer may initiate compensation

payments without prejudice and without admitting liability

pursuant to a notice of temporary compensation payable as

prescribed by the department.

2

14, 2012, Claimant received a check from Employer paying Claimant lost wages

from May 15, 2012, until June 6, 2012. The following day, June 15, 2012,

Employer issued a Notice of Compensation Denial (NCD) and the NSTC,2 having

determined that it did not accept liability for the claim.

Both parties submitted fact and medical expert witness testimony

before the WCJ on whether Claimant’s purported injuries were work-related.

Rejecting Claimant’s testimony as not credible, the WCJ denied benefits because

Claimant did not meet her burden of proving that she sustained a work-related

injury.

Claimant appealed the decision to the Board, contending that, among

other things, the WCJ erred because he failed to determine whether Employer did

not send Claimant an NSTC within five days of the last payment, converting the

NTCP into a Notice of Compensation Payable (NCP) by operation of law.3

2

Employer filed the NSTC pursuant to Section 406.1(d)(4) of the Act, 77 P.S. §

717.1(d)(4), which provides, “Payments of temporary compensation may continue until such

time as the employer decides to controvert the claim.”

3

The “five-day rule” under Section 406.1(d)(5)(i) of the Act provides:

If the employer ceases making payments pursuant to a notice of

temporary compensation payable, a notice in the form prescribed

by the department shall be sent to the claimant and a copy filed

with the department, but in no event shall this notice be sent or

filed later than five (5) days after the last payment.

77 P.S. § 717.1(d)(5)(i). Section 406.1(d)(6) of the Act provides:

If the employer does not file a notice under paragraph (5) within

the ninety-day period during which temporary compensation is

(Footnote continued on next page…)

3

Finding that Employer did not violate the five-day rule under Section

406.1(d)(5)(i) of the Act, 77 P.S. § 717.1(d)(5)(i), because the NSTC was sent

within five days of when Claimant received the last payment, the Board affirmed

the WCJ’s decision. Claimant then filed this petition for review.4

II.

The only issue on appeal is what is the event from which the NSTC

has to be sent or filed within no later than 5 days as set forth in Section

406.1(d)(5)(i) of the Act, 77 P.S. § 717.1(d)(5)(i). Claimant contends that the five-

day period begins from the last date for which compensation is payable, not when

payment is sent. She contends that if the five-day period is calculated from the

date that payment is made, it would allow Employer to extend the period within

which it may deny a claim under an NTCP by merely dating a check to coincide

with the date on which it is issued. If Claimant’s contention is accepted, the five

day period is calculated from the last date for which compensation was paid, i.e.

June 6, 2012, not the date the payment was sent, June 14, 2012, making the June

(continued…)

paid or payable, the employer shall be deemed to have admitted

liability and the notice of temporary compensation payable shall be

converted to a notice of compensation payable.

77 P.S. § 717.1(d)(6).

4

Our review of a decision of the Board is limited to determining whether errors of law

were made, whether constitutional rights were violated, and whether necessary findings of fact

are supported by substantial evidence. Ward v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (City of

Philadelphia), 966 A.2d 1159, 1162 n.4 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2009), appeal denied, 982 A.2d 1229 (Pa.

2009).

4

15, 2012 NSTC out of time with the effect that the NTCP was converted by

operation of law into an NCP.

Section 406.1 of the Act sets forth an employer’s obligations and sets

time limits and procedures on how an employer is to make a determination on the

validity of the claim, including the payment of temporary compensation to extend

the period to determine the claim’s validity and the time for making payments of

compensation. What is considered the “last payment” under Section 406.1(d)(5)(i)

of the Act can be discerned by what is considered “payment” in Section 406.1(a) of

the Act, which provides, in pertinent part:

The employer and insurer shall promptly investigate each

injury reported or known to the employer and shall

proceed promptly to commence the payment of

compensation due either pursuant to an agreement upon

the compensation payable or a notice of compensation

payable . . . or pursuant to a notice of temporary

compensation payable as set forth in subsection (d). . . .

The first installment of compensation shall be paid

not later than the twenty-first day after the employer

has notice or knowledge of the employe’s disability. . . .

77 P.S. § 717.1(a) (emphases added).

Because it provides that “compensation shall be paid not later than the

twenty-first day” after an agreement, NCP or NTCP, under Section 406.1(a), time

is calculated from when compensation must be paid, not the last period for which

compensation is payable ended. Moreover, an employer cannot manipulate the

period within which it may deny a claim under an NTCP by merely dating a check

5

to coincide with the date on which it issued because those payments are required to

be issued in the manner set forth by the Act.5

For the reasons set forth above, the Board’s order is affirmed.

_________________________________

DAN PELLEGRINI, Senior Judge

5

Claimant also contends that in Thomas Lindstrom Co. v. Workers’ Compensation

Appeal Board (Braun), 992 A.2d 961 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2010), we held that the appropriate date to

calculate the “last payment” from which an NSTC must be issued under Section 406.1 of the Act

is always the last day of the final payment period. While in that case we used the end of the pay

period, Lindstrom involved a unique factual pattern because the last payment of temporary

compensation was made for a period after the check for payment was sent. In that case, claimant

received his last payment of compensation under the NTCP on February 11, 2003, but that check

covered payment of compensation until February 20, 2003. On February 21, 2003, the employer

issued an NSTC. Because the NSTC was not sent within five days of when payment was

received, Claimant contended that the NSTC was converted to an NCP. We found that the

employer filed notice within five days of the “last payment” because employer prepaid the

claimant’s benefits at the beginning of each pay period, and the “last payment” was received on

the date he was no longer being paid temporary compensation. Implicit in our decision is that an

NSTC could not be issued and time could not begin to run while temporary compensation was

still being paid. We went on to note that “it would not make sense and it would not serve the

purposes of the Act to penalize an employer for pre-paying an employee’s benefits.” Id. at 969.

6

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Terri Jones, :

Petitioner :

:

v. : No. 1531 C.D. 2016

:

Workers’ Compensation Appeal :

Board (Villanova University), :

Respondent :

ORDER

AND NOW, this 30th day of March, 2017, it is hereby ordered that the

order of the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board dated August 16, 2016, is

affirmed.

_________________________________

DAN PELLEGRINI, Senior Judge

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.