 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Best v. State Fund5/3/1996
ry. Moreover, the court further noted that Dr. Vande Veegaete "confirmed that, in his opinion, [Best] has been unable to work since 1991" during his deposition.
Thus, review of Dr. Vande Veegaete's opinions alone, as expressed in numerous letters and during his deposition, illustrates the conflicting evidence regarding when Best became permanently totally disabled which was presented to and weighed by the Workers' Compensation Court. We will not substitute our judgment for that of the Workers' Compensation Court when the issue relates to the weight given to evidence. Wilson, 903 P.2d at 787 (citing Burns, 885 P.2d at 509). Moreover, our standard of review is not whether evidence supports findings different from those made by the Workers' Compensation Court, but whether substantial credible evidence supports the court's findings. Wilson, 903 P.2d at 788 (citing Caekaert v. State Compensation Mutual Ins. Fund (1994), 268 Mont. 105, 110, 885 P.2d 495, 498).
Best also argues on appeal that, since he was employed at Stockman's in 1992 and 1993, he clearly was not permanently totally disabled prior to his 1993 injury . Best testified that he did 60% to 90%, while his wife did 10% to 40%, of their work at Stockman's. However, Best's trial testimony was not the only evidence presented on this subject and the Workers' Compensation Court was entitled to consider inconsistent statements and other evidence which contradicted Best's testimony in determining his credibility. See Nave v. State Compensation Mutual Ins. Fund (1992), 254 Mont. 54, 59, 835 P.2d 706, 709.
In support of his social security disability claim, Best prepared letters for others to sign in which he represented that his wife did 90% to 95% of the work at Stockman's. Moreover, Best's attorney for that claim wrote a letter dated August 14, 1993, which stated in pertinent part:
t is unequivocally clear that Mrs. Best did at least 95% or more of the work. From the evidence, about the only thing [Best] did was open up and then try to survive. He was at home more than he was at work.
From the evidence, it is clear that [Best] was not able to work, and, in fact, did not work. Mrs. Best did the work for the Stockman's as between [Best] and Mrs. Best.
(Emphasis added.)
The Workers' Compensation Court found Best's testimony that he performed 60% to 90% of the work at Stockman's incredible. We will not substitute our judgment for that of the Workers' Compensation Court in matters of witness credibility. Wilson, 903 P.2d at 787 (citing Burns, 885 P.2d at 509).
We conclude that substantial credible evidence supports the Workers' Compensation Court's finding that Best has been permanently totally disabled and unable to perform even sedentary work since 1991.
Affirmed.
JUSTICES NELSON, ERDMANN, HUNT and TRIEWEILER concur.
|