 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Burns v. Pierce12/6/2000
ced to appellant's compensable injury. Moreover, Dr. Schlesinger stated that if appellant's symptoms were treated by the surgery, perhaps the surgery also treated the neck and shoulder pain.
At the hearing before the ALJ, appellant testified that since he last saw Dr. Schlesinger in September 1997 his condition has remained the same, getting no better nor any worse, including the period after the surgery performed by Dr. Patterson. Appellant also stated that he continued to work for appellee performing his normal job duties from the date of his injury until he was laid off in July 1997 due to the seasonal nature of his employment. Appellant also testified that he drew unemployment from July 1997 until July 14, 1998. During the period that he drew unemployment appellant testified that held himself out as able to work and actively sought employment.
Based on this evidence the Commission determined that appellant had failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the treatment provided by Dr. Patterson was reasonable or necessary in relation to appellant's compensable injury . Specifically, in concluding that the treatment was not reasonable or necessary, the Commission noted appellant testified that his condition had not improved since the surgery.
On appellate review of workers' compensation cases, the appellate court views the evidence and all reasonable inferences deducible therefrom in the light most favorable to the findings of the Commission and will affirm the Commission's ruling if there is any substantial evidence to support the findings made. Beaver v. Benton County, 66 Ark. App. 153, 991 S.W.2d 618 (1999). Substantial evidence is that relevant evidence which a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. Patterson v. Frito Lay, Inc., 66 Ark. App. 159, 992 S.W.2d 130 (1999). The determination of the credibility and weight to be afforded a witness's testimony is within the sole province of the Workers' Compensation Commission. American Greetings Corp. v. Garey, 61 Ark. App. 18, 963 S.W.2d 613 (1998). The Commission's authority to resolve conflicting evidence also extends to medical testimony. Maverick Transportation v. Buzzard, 69 Ark. App. 128, 10 S.W.3d 467 (2000). If reasonable minds could reach the Commission's conclusion, its decision must be affirmed. Min-Ark Pallet Co. v. Lindsey, 58 Ark. App. 309, 950 S.W.2d 468 (1997).
Arkansas Code Annotated ยง 11-9-508(a) (Repl. 1996), requires employers to provide such medical services as may be reasonably necessary in connection with the employee's injury . American Greetings Corp., supra. Whether a medical procedure is reasonable and necessary is a question of fact to be decided by the Commission. Air Compressor Equipment v. Sword, 69 Ark. App. 162, 11 S.W.3d 1 (2000).
For reversal, appellant contends that the Commission's decision is not supported by substantial evidence. Specifically, he argues that the evidence was insufficient to find that his treatment under Dr. Patterson was not reasonable and necessary with respect to his compensable injury . We do not agree.
In Winslow v. D & B Mechanical Contractors, 69 Ark. App. 285, ___ S.W.3d ___ (2000), this court ruled that post-surgical improvement is a proper consideration in determining whether the surgery was reasonable and necessary. In the instant action, the appellant admitted that he has experienced no improvement in his symptoms since he last saw Dr. Schlesinger in 1997, including the period following the surgery performed by Dr. Patterson. In addition to appellant's admission that the surgery did not alleviate his condition, prior to the surgery being performed, Dr. Schlesinger had stated that there wa
Page 1 2 3 Arkansas Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|