Workers' Compensation

On July 25, 2015, the claimant, an emergency room nurse, began experiencing significant pain in her leg, which increased over the course of her shift. By the end of her shift, the claimant could not walk. She called off the following day and saw her doctor, who took her out of work. On November 23, 2015, the claimant notified her employer that she sustained an injury on July 25, 2015. Initially, the employer issued a Notice of Temporary Compensation Payable (NTCP), but then issued a Notice of Compensation Denial (NCD) and a Notice Stopping Temporary Compensation Payable (NSTCP). The claimant then filed a claim petition.

Although the Workers’ Compensation Judge found that the claimant did sustain a work injury, the judge also found that the claimant’s November 23, 2015, notice to her employer was one day late under § 311 of the Act and denied the claim petition.

The claimant appealed to the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board, which reversed. According to the Board, the 120^th day after the claimant’s work injury was November 22, 2015, a Sunday. Because § 311 of the Act was silent as to whether notice must be given to an employer on a Sunday, the Board looked at the Statutory Construction Act of 1972, which states that whenever the last day of any such period shall fall on Saturday or Sunday, or any day made a legal holiday, such day shall be omitted from the computation. Thus, the Board held that the claimant was required to provide notice by Monday, November 23, 2015, and in fact did so. The case was remanded to the Workers’ Compensation Judge for a calculation of the compensation to be awarded to the claimant.

Following the judge’s decision on the remand, the employer appealed to the Board, which again held that the claimant’s notice of her work injury was timely. The employer then appealed to the Commonwealth Court.

The court noted that the Act requires an employee to give notice of an injury to the employer within 120 days of the injury’s occurrence, but is silent on how to calculate the 120-day time period. The court rejected the employer’s argument that the Statutory Construction Act did not apply to § 311 since the Statutory Construction Act essentially states that it applies to all statutes. The court also rejected the employer’s position that the calculation of 120 days for notice under § 311 was dependent on whether the employer operates over the weekend. The court considered this to be a hyper-technical reading of § 311 that directly contradicted the legislature’s directive in the Statutory Construction Act of 1972. The court dismissed the employer’s appeal.

 

_{What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. We would be pleased to provide such legal assistance as you require on these and other subjects when called upon. ATTORNEY ADVERTISING pursuant to New York RPC 7.1 Copyright © 2021 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm. For reprints or inquiries, or if you wish to be removed from this mailing list, contact tamontemuro@mdwcg.com.}