The Commonwealth Court has ruled that the Workers' Compensation Appeal Board went too far in affirming an injured mechanic's suspended workers' compensation benefits.

A three-judge panel consisting of Judges Mary Hannah Leavitt, Anne E. Covey and Christine Fizzano Cannon held that the board misstated the burden of proof in a reinstatement petition by ignoring claimant Gualberto Perez's burden to prove ongoing disability.

In 2014, Perez tore his rotator cuff while working as a mechanic for Tyson Shared Services. According to Covey's opinion, he collected unemployment benefits while recovering from surgery and was subsequently cleared for light duty. He was offered a job as a janitor in 2015 but refused.

A workers' compensation judge later suspended his benefits, reasoning that Perez was no longer disabled. On appeal, the board modified the workers' compensation judge's ruling and granted Perez's motion to reinstate benefits.

Tyson argued to the Commonwealth Court that the board mistakenly placed the burden on the employer to prove that Perez was no longer disabled and held that evidence of his doctor's clearance for modified duty was hearsay, according to Covey.

"In the instant case, the factual issue is whether claimant's loss of wages was caused and continued to be caused by his work-related injury," Covey said, noting that Perez wrongly refused the 2015 job offer.

"Thus, the burden was on claimant to demonstrate that he was disabled for the period in question. The WCJ found credible claimant's testimony that he was unable to work immediately following the Aug. 10, 2016, surgery," Covey continued. "However, the WCJ rejected claimant's assertion that claimant continued to be 'unable to work in any capacity' because it was inconsistent with both Dr. [Matthew] Espenshade's testimony and Dr. [Brian] Brislin's office notes clearing claimant to return to modified-duty work on Oct. 25, 2016."

In short, the workers' compensation judge found Perez's claims as to disability only partly credible.

"Thus, claimant's evidence that he continued to be disabled beyond Oct. 24, 2016, was found not to be credible, and there is no other credible evidence supporting claimant's position. Accordingly, claimant did not meet his burden of proving ongoing disability beyond Oct. 24, 2016, and the board erred when it modified the WCJ's decision," Covey said.

Perez is represented by Neil Kerzner of Larry Pitt & Associates in Philadelphia, who did not respond to a call seeking  comment.

Tyson is represented by Joshua Schwartz of Barley Snyder, who did not respond to a call seeking comment.