 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
HAPNEY v. RHEEM MANUFACTURING CO.6/2/1999
involving her neck does not change the fact that it was, medically, to her cervical spine at two levels. Unless we are to judicially declare the cervical spine to not be part of the vertebral column — a declaration that would offend medical science at the very least — we should reverse the Commission's decision on this point.
The term "back" in § 11-9-102(5)(A)(ii)(b) is not a term of art or a technical term within the meaning of the Workers' Compensation Law or medical science, for that matter. In fact, the medical diagnosis attached to appellant's injury is that she sustained herniated discs at two levels of her cervical spine (C5-6 and C6-7), with resulting spinal stenosis (narrowing of the nerve roots serving the affected vertebrae). If medical science considers the cervical spine to be part of the "vertebral column with associated muscles (erector spinae and trasversospinalisis) and overlying integument" so as to be within the meaning of the term "back" — a fact conceded by counsel for appellee in its brief — I do not understand why the judicial system (including the quasi-judicial Commission) should be deemed better informed.
|