Court Opinion

ID: 9735828
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 18:32:00.498163+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:27:01.873722
License: Public Domain

KELLEY, Judge,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. While I agree that the employer should be sanctioned with a fíne and penalty, I believe that the majority has misapplied the section relied upon.
Section 435 of the Act, 77 P.S. § 991, specifically refers to the implementation of:
(d)(i) Employers and insurers may be penalized a sum not exceeding ten per centum of the amount awarded and interest accrued and payable: Provided, however, That such penalty may be increased to twenty per centum in cases of unreasonable or excessive delays. Such penalty shall be payable to the same persons to whom the compensation is payable.
The language specifically restricts the penalty to be based on the amount of the award. Since in this case the award was not sustained on appeal, there is no underlying basis upon which to make the percentage of the penalty applicable.
I, therefore, believe it is erroneous for reliance on section 435 of the Act to impose the penalty.
Accordingly, I would remand with instructions to assess a penalty upon the employer based upon the avoidance of the payment, a supersedeas having been denied of an outstanding order, and obligation to pay compensation.
Accordingly, I dissent on the reasoning of the majority.