"In order to hold in the manner in which you're arguing we would have to read 'purchase' to mean any change in coverage," said Justice Christine Donohue, who sits on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court bench.
The employer asserted the "positive work order" defense, which required proof that there was a specific policy in place, the claimant knew about the employer's policy, and that the claimant's conduct at the time of injury removed the claimant from the course of employment.