Bufford v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (North American Telecom)

Summary

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania addressed the burdens of proof in proceedings to reinstate suspended workers' compensation benefits under Section 413(a) of the Pennsylvania Workers' Compensation Act. The court held that the claimant must show that earning power is again adversely affected by a continuing disability related to the original claim, after which the opposing party must show that the loss of earnings is not caused by the work-related disability. The court rejected the rule that a claimant is barred from reinstatement merely because the claimant left modified-duty employment with the time-of-injury employer for better-paying work with another employer that later ended involuntarily.

Holdings

1. A claimant seeking reinstatement of suspended workers' compensation benefits must prove that earning power is again adversely affected by the claimant's disability and that the disability is a continuation of the disability underlying the original claim. The claimant need not re-prove that the disability resulted from the original work-related injury.
2. Once the claimant satisfies the initial burden, the burden shifts to the party opposing reinstatement to show that the claimant's loss of earnings is not caused by the disability arising from the work-related injury.
3. A claimant remains eligible to seek reinstatement of suspended benefits when employment with a post-injury employer ends, even if the claimant previously performed modified-duty work for the time-of-injury employer and voluntarily left that position for better pay or working conditions.

Questions Presented

1. What burden of proof must a claimant meet to obtain reinstatement of suspended workers' compensation benefits under section 413(a) when the claimant leaves modified-duty employment for another job that later ends involuntarily?
2. How does section 413(a) allocate the burdens of proof between the claimant seeking reinstatement and the party opposing reinstatement?
3. Whether leaving modified-duty employment with the time-of-injury employer for better pay or working conditions constitutes claimant fault that independently bars reinstatement of suspended benefits.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded