 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Copar12/18/2003
TO BE PUBLISHED
OPINION OF THE COURT AFFIRMING
After being awarded interlocutory temporary total disability (TTD) benefits, the claimant was later found to be permanently and totally disabled. The employer was given credit against the award for any benefits that it had previously paid. Appealing decisions that affirmed, the employer has asserted that the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) improperly considered opinions that were found in certain hospital records, that the ALJ failed to comply with KRS 342.0011 when determining the extent of disability, and that it was denied meaningful appellate review of the order granting interlocutory TTD. We affirm.
The claimant was born in 1963 and was a high school graduate with one year of training as a licensed practical nurse. She had worked as a restaurant hostess and server and also as a factory worker . At the time of her injury, she was employed as a factory production worker, work that required her to stand for prolonged periods and to lift up to 75 pounds on a regular basis.
The claimant was injured on January 25, 1999, when a door that she was opening was caught by a draft, causing her to jerk and twist her back. She experienced an immediate popping sensation in her low back that was followed by severe pain in her low back and right leg. Her claim alleged that she was in constant pain thereafter and, as a result, that she also developed psychological problems from the pain and from economic pressures due to her inability to work. She testified that she had undergone no psychological treatment before the injury. Although she admitted that she had been involved in a post-injury automobile accident, she maintained that neither it nor personal difficulties contributed to her problems.
The claimant testified that Drs. Taylor and Naimoli continued to treat her for chronic pain and that Drs. Sivley and DeLaRocha continued to provide psychological counseling and to prescribe medication. She stated that her pain and psychiatric medications helped, but sometimes they made her groggy. She testified that she had been awarded Social Security Disability and did not think that she was capable of gainful employment. When questioned about testimony by Ms. Cavanah, she denied riding in a four-wheeler or the back of a pickup truck but indicated that her daughter, who resembles her in size and appearance, may have done so. She testified that Ms. Cavanah had allegedly stolen from her (the claimant's) mother and may have been seeking revenge since it was the claimant's daughter who accused her.
The claimant introduced medical evidence from Dr. Taylor with respect to her physical problems. He testified that although the claimant had sustained previous work related back injuries in July and December of 1997, her symptoms had almost completely resolved by February 16, 1998. She did not seek further treatment for back complaints until February 2, 1999, after the most recent injury. At that time, he diagnosed L5-S1 nerve root irritation due to the incident at work. As of March 2, 1999, the condition had not responded to conservative treatment, so he took the claimant off work. After two of the employer's experts testified that the claimant had reached maximum medical improvement (MMI), Dr. Taylor was asked to assign an impairment rating. Although he did not think that she had reached MMI, he estimated an AMA impairment of 15% due to the injury. He explained that he had not assigned work restrictions because he did not think the claimant was capable of working. He stated that an August, 1999, vehicular accident caused only a temporary period of discomfort.
Dr. Awh, a diagnostic radiologist, interpreted a Ma
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Kentucky Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|