Roach v. Oswald Lever Co.

Citations

• 274 Pa. 139
• 117 A. 785
• 1922 Pa. LEXIS 653

Syllabus

<p>Workmen’s compensation — Appeals—Evidence—Record—Review on appeal — Acts of June 2,1916, P. L. 786, and June 26,1919, P. L. 61$ — Physical examination of claimant — Discretion of referee— Abuse — Appeals—Award—Interlocutory order.</p> <p>1. While under the Act of Jime 26, 1919, P. L. 642, amending the Workmen’s Compensation Act of June 2, 1915, P. L. 736, the appellate court has the entire record before it, its revisory powers are limited to a determination of the question whether there is evidence to support the findings, and whether the law has been properly applied to them.</p> <p>2. A finding that a workman was totally disabled as the result of a brain lesion caused by an accident, will be sustained, where three physicians, one a nerve specialist, testified that, in their opinion, claimant’s disability resulted from the accident, and the opinion was strengthened by the fact that one seemed to follow the other almost immediately.</p> <p>3. Where a claimant for compensation for physical disability has twice submitted himself for physical examination at the instance of defendant, the referee, in the exercise of a sound discretion, may refuse to order a further examination of such character. The action of the referee will not be reversed, where no abuse of discretion is shown.</p> <p>4. If he refuses the order, and an appeal is taken therefrom to the compensation board, the referee may proceed to a hearing of the ease on its merits, pending such an appeal, inasmuch as the appeal is interlocutory in character.</p> <p>5. The appeal which any party in interest may take to the board, within ten days after notice, is from the award or disallowance of compensation, and not from interlocutory orders.</p>