Summary
The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania held that diagnostic testing may qualify as a "physical examination" under Section 314(a) of the Pennsylvania Workers' Compensation Act. Such testing is permissible when it is sought to evaluate the extent of a claimant's injuries and the employer demonstrates that it is necessary, involves no more than minimal risk, and is not unreasonably intrusive. The court affirmed the Commonwealth Court's order, while noting that the particular dispute was technically moot because the claimant had already undergone the testing.
Holdings
- The issue was reviewable despite claimant's having undergone the testing because it was capable of repetition and likely to evade judicial review; claimants generally must comply with examinations to preserve benefits.
- Diagnostic testing falls within the statutory definition of physical examination when sought to evaluate the extent of a claimant's injuries, provided the employer demonstrates that the tests are necessary, involve no more than minimal risk, and are not unreasonably intrusive.
- The meaning of an undefined statutory term is a question of law rather than a matter requiring opinion testimony about the term's meaning in the medical profession.
- The reasonable-and-necessary standard applies to initial as well as subsequent examinations under section 651(a), and the examination must be evaluated in relation to its risk, intrusiveness, and scope.
Questions Presented
- Whether the appeal remained reviewable under the capable-of-repetition-but-likely-to-evade-review exception to mootness after claimant underwent the requested testing.
- Whether the term physical examination in 77 P.S. § 651(a) includes diagnostic testing such as an MRI and triphasic bone scan.
- Whether the meaning of an undefined statutory term is a question of law requiring medical expert testimony.
- What limitations apply when an employer seeks diagnostic testing as part of a workers' compensation physical examination.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (26)
- Commonwealth v. Joint Bargaining Committee for Pennsylvania Social Services Union, 484 Pa. 175, 398 A.2d 1001 (1979)(followed)
- Walker v. WCAB, 792 A.2d 628 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2002)(followed)
- Coleman v. WCAB, 808 A.2d 336 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2002)(followed)
- Maranc v. WCAB, 156 Pa. Cmwlth. 572, 628 A.2d 522 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1993)(followed)
- Pettineo v. Philadelphia Law Department, 721 A.2d 65 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1998)(followed)
- Commonwealth v. Gilmour Manufacturing Co., 573 Pa. 143, 822 A.2d 676 (2003)(followed)
- Morgan v. MacPhail, 550 Pa. 202, 704 A.2d 617 (1997)(followed)
- Unora v. Glen Alden Coal Co., 377 Pa. 7, 104 A.2d 104 (1954)(followed)
- L.E. Smith Glass Co. v. WCAB, 571 Pa. 594, 813 A.2d 634 (2002)(followed)
- Pancoast v. WCAB, 734 A.2d 52 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1999)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 26.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…