 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State ex rel First Energy Corp. v. Stover6/11/2002
d 203. Findings of Fact:
1. Claimant sustained a work-related injury on February 8, 1982, and her claim has been allowed for: "Sprain low back; compression of L5 motor root; particularly on the left side; failed back syndrome; two level degenerative disc disease status post laminectomy and discectomy." In July 1982, claimant underwent a lumbar-laminectomy at L4-5.
2. Following her back surgery, claimant returned to work and was placed in a light duty capacity.
3. Claimant suffered an exacerbation of her injury in 1983, and her treating physician placed her off work.
4. In 1985, claimant underwent a micro-lumbar decompression surgery. It was after this surgery failed to alleviate her pain that claimant's claim was additionally allowed for "failed back syndrome" and "two-level degenerative disc disease status post laminectomy and discectomy."
5. Claimant returned to work; however, she sustained another exacerbation of her lower back injury in 1992. Claimant received a period of temporary total disability compensation.
6. In 1992, claimant was terminated from her employment due to excessive absenteeism.
7. Following her termination, claimant applied for security positions at other companies but was not offered a job .
8. On November 7, 2000, claimant filed an application for PTD compensation supported by the October 9, 2000 report of Dr. William R. Bauer, who opined as follows:
As a result of the patients injury to the nerve roots she has chronic pain that is disabling in and of itself, along with the numbness, weakness, and muscle pain that renders her permanently and totally disabled. She is such because of the nature of the injuries, their effect upon her nervous system, and with the pain there is not a job that she could do even sedentary that could be performed, because of the effect upon her nervous system, both peripheral and central.
9. Claimant was also examined by doctor S.S. Purewal, M.D., who issued a report dated November 29, 2000, and opined as follows:
* Based on the above evaluation of this patient and taking into account the allowed conditions under this claim, it is my opinion that this patient is not permanently and totally disabled. It is true that she is not able to return to her former position of employment as a security guard if that job involved extended periods of standing and walking. On the other hand, she is able to engage in sustained remunerative employment in a sedentary or light category. She would be able to perform a job which requires up to 10 pounds of lifting continuously and 20 pounds of lifting occasionally. She would not be able to perform a job that would require extended periods of sitting or standing in one position, but a job where she can move about periodically would be suitable for her physical capabilities.
10. Claimant submitted a vocational capacity evaluation prepared by Barbara Gearhart, M.Ed., CRC, LPC, and Teresa J. Kahler, Ph.D., dated March 2, 2001. Several vocational tests were administered to claimant and ultimately Gearhart and Kahler concluded as follows:
Mrs. Stover does not appear to have any transferable skills from past work. Furthermore, any jobs requiring reading or report writing would likely be very difficult for her based on today's assessment.
Please see Vocational Assessment portion of this report for details. The fact that she passed the GED and went on to complete the Police Academy is rather remarkable given her performance on a test of basic skills and a test of overall ability. She did say that she "walked the floors" many nights in preparation for exa
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Ohio Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|