 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. v. Baker6/18/1999
Shelby Dee Baker sued his employer, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., to recover workers' compensation benefits. After conducting a trial, the circuit court entered an order finding Baker permanently and totally disabled and awarding benefits accordingly. Wal-Mart appealed.
The Alabama Workers' Compensation Act provides that " n reviewing pure findings of fact, the finding of the circuit court shall not be reversed if that finding is supported by substantial evidence." Ala. Code 1975, ยง 25-5-81(e)(2). In interpreting the term "substantial evidence," the Supreme Court of Alabama has stated:
" nder the applicable standard of review, we will not reverse the trial court's finding of fact if that finding is supported by substantial evidence -- if that finding is supported by 'evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved.'" West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So. 2d 870, 871 (Ala. 1989).
The record indicates that Baker had worked as a truck driver for approximately 30 years. Wal-Mart hired Baker as a truck driver in April 1995. On January 5, 1996, Baker was injured when he slipped while attempting to climb out of his truck. He landed on the ground, on his back. He was treated in an emergency room, and he later underwent surgery on his back to correct a herniated disc.
Baker's surgery did not correct the injury to his back, but his doctors concluded that he was not a candidate for further surgery. His surgeon referred him to Dr. Roger W. Kemp for management of continued back pain. Dr. Kemp concluded that Baker had "failed back syndrome" and determined that Baker had reached maximum medical improvement on April 23, 1997. Dr. Kemp testified that, at the time Baker reached maximum medical improvement, he made a determination that Baker was "most likely at permanent total disability."
Two "Functional Capacity Evaluations" ("FCEs") were conducted on Baker. The first FCE was conducted on February 17, 1997; it reflected that Baker demonstrated submaximal effort during the test. The FCE indicated that Baker could be employed in sedentary to light-duty jobs.
The second FCE was conducted on October 29, 1997; as a result of that FCE, the examiner assigned Baker a 10% impairment rating. However, the examiner could not assess work restrictions for Baker, because of Baker's significant symptom magnification and indications of submaximal effort during the course of the FCE examination. We note that the examiner did report that Baker undoubtedly had some pain and some restrictions because of his injury and his pain, but he reported that he could not assess Baker's work restrictions because of the invalidity of the FCEs.
Wal-Mart submitted a vocational report indicating that, although the assessment was difficult because of Baker's submaximal efforts on the FCEs, Baker had suffered a 48% to 52% loss of access to employment.
Marilyn Oakes, the vocational expert who testified on behalf of Baker, testified that Baker was permanently and totally disabled as a result of his back injury. Oakes testified that Baker was functionally illiterate and that he scored low on dexterity testing; Oakes testified that Baker had lost access to over 99% of all jobs in Alabama.
Baker testified at trial that he was in constant pain and that he was unable to either sit or stand for any significant length of time without pain. Baker's wife testified that, because of his pain, his activities were severely restricted.
Wal-Mart argues that the trial court erred in determining that Baker was permanently and
Page 1 2 3 Alabama Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|