 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Rimcor12/6/2000
mber 17, 1998, until a date yet to be determined. In Roberson v. Waste Management, 58 Ark. App. 11, 944 S.W.2d 858 (1997), we stated:
Temporary total disability is that period within the healing period in which an employee suffers a total incapacity to earn wages. J.A. Riggs Tractor Co. v. Etzkorn, 30 Ark. App. 200, 785 S.W.2d 51 (1990). The healing period is that period for healing of the injury which continues until the employee is as far restored as the permanent character of the injury will permit. If the underlying condition causing the disability has become more stable and if nothing further in the way of treatment will improve that condition, the healing period has ended. Nix v. Wilson World Hotel, 46 Ark. App. 303, 879 S.W.2d 457 (1994). The Commission has the duty of weighing the medical evidence as it does any other evidence, id., and its resolution of the medical evidence has the force and effect of a jury verdict. McClain v. Texaco, Inc., 29 Ark. App. 218, 780 S.W.2d 34 (1989). 58 Ark. App. at 13, 944 S.W.2d at 860.
It is clear from Dr. Standefer's report that there are several options he wishes to explore with regard to appellee's back problems. None of appellee's physicians believes that appellee has reached maximum medical improvement with regard to his back. Therefore, there is substantial evidence that appellee remains in his healing period.
With regard to appellee's ability to earn wages, the ALJ concluded that the greater weight of the evidence indicated that appellee's back condition precluded him from engaging in any employment activities requiring frequent bending or twisting at the waist; prolonged sitting, standing, or walking; and heavy lifting or carrying. In support of its argument, appellant points to the testimony of Dr. Heim that appellee would not be disabled if only his back problem were taken into consideration. However, the Commission has the authority to accept or reject medical opinions and to determine their medical soundness and probative force. Jordan v. Tyson Foods, Inc., 51 Ark. App. 100, 911 S.W.2d 593 (1995). Once the Commission has before it firm medical evidence of physical impairment and functional limitation, it has the advantage of its own superior knowledge of industrial demands, limitations, and requirements, and can apply that knowledge and expertise in weighing the medical evidence of functional limitations together with other evidence of the manner in which the functional disability will affect the ability of an injured employee to obtain or hold a job . City of Fayetteville v. Guess, 10 Ark. App. 313, 663 S.W.2d 946 (1984). Although Guess concerned a permanent partial disability rating rather than temporary total disability, the Commission's superior knowledge is no less applicable in the area of temporary total disability. Here, Dr. Heim testified that the limitations he placed on appellant for his ankle were the same limitations for his back. There is substantial evidence to support the Commission's decision that appellee was temporarily totally disabled by his back injury from December 17, 1998, until a time yet to be determined.
Affirmed.
Koonce and Crabtree, JJ., agree.
|