 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Bi-Lo Food Warehouse v. McCause8/11/1992
oyer contends that Claimant had been treated by two physicians, [a chiropractor, Dr. G., and a physician, Dr. O.,] who both treated and released her with no referral. This Court can find no report from either Dr. G. or Dr. O. showing that they treated and released Claimant. Their treatment of her is indicated in reports of other doctors and in Claimant's answers to interrogatories propounded by Employer. However, there is nothing in the record to indicate she received a release from them prior to the time she was treated by Dr. D. This contention is without merit. Moreover, the record supports the fact that Claimant was under the care of Dr. D. at the time of trial.
Findings of fact made by the trial court are binding and conclusive in review proceedings before this Court, unless they lack support in competent evidence. Parks v. Norman Municipal Hospital, 684 P.2d 548 (Okl. 1984). It is only when competent evidence is lacking that the trial court's decision may be determined to be erroneous as a matter of law. Parks, supra. The probative value and weight to be given medical evidence is an issue for the Workers' Compensation Court's determination. See Department of Public Safety v. Jones, 578 P.2d 1197 (Okl. 1978). Evidence of one expert may be accepted while that of another may be rejected in whole or in part. Department of Public Safety v. Jones, supra.
The order of the Workers' Compensation Court is supported by competent evidence.
ORDER SUSTAINED.
ADAMS, P.J., and JONES, J., concur.
|