 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Castor v. Café10/26/2005
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
Appellant Clifford Castor appeals the denial of additional benefits by the Workers' Compensation Commission in his claim against appellee Southfork Café. Appellant asserts on appeal that he was either rendered permanently and totally disabled as a result of his work injury or that he was entitled to wage-loss disability benefits in excess of his permanent impairment rating. Thus, appellant contends that the Commission's decision lacks substantial evidence to support its conclusion. We disagree, holding that there is a substantial basis upon which to deny additional benefits. Therefore, we affirm.
To explain in more detail, appellant suffered a work-related injury when he slipped and fell while working as a chef for Southfork in July 1997. The injury was accepted as a compensable injury by his employer. Appellant's back injury required two lumbar fusion surgeries, one in January 1999 and one in January 2000, and the implantation of a medication pump to relieve pain in March 2001. In September 2001, appellant was given a 15 percent permanent impairment rating attributable to the back surgeries, which was accepted and paid by appellee. Appellant sought additional benefits, contending that he was permanently and totally disabled. Appellee controverted the claim for additional benefits and argued that even if appellant was entitled to wage-loss disability benefits, those were the responsibility of the Second Injury Fund. The administrative law judge (ALJ) found that appellant was entitled to a 45 percent wage-loss disability benefit over and above the 15 percent permanent impairment rating. The ALJ also found that the Second Injury Fund bore no responsibility. Appellee Southfork appealed to the Commission, which reversed the ALJ and found that appellant had failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he was entitled to wage-loss disability benefits. The Commission affirmed the finding that the Second Injury Fund had no liability. This appeal followed, in which only appellant and appellee Southfork appear; the Second Injury Fund did not participate.
To perform the proper review on appeal, we must examine the basis for the Commission's findings. The Commission set forth the relevant law on the subject of wage-loss disability benefits and permanent and total disability benefits. It reviewed the record of testimony at the April 2002 hearing. Appellant called six friends to testify about how appellant had been a strong and physically active man prior to this work injury , but his physical condition was markedly diminished after his injury and surgeries. His witnesses, however, had not seen him in the six months preceding the hearing because appellant had moved from Mountain Home, Arkansas, to Florida. One friend noted that since he had moved to Florida, appellant usually talked about sunning in Florida's year-round mild weather.
The Commission also had before it the testimony of appellant, who was fifty-four years old at the time of the hearing. Appellant testified that he had a college degree with a double major (business and commercial advertising), which he completed in less than four years, but he had not used those majors for work purposes except briefly after graduation. Appellant worked between 1970 and 1985 as a professional baseball umpire, but he tired of the fast pace and extensive travel, so he quit. Appellant chose to settle in Arkansas and built his own house, which he constructed between 1992 and 1996. In 1994, appellant began working at the Southfork Café in Salem, Arkansas, acting as head chef. Appellant trained for the job and considered himself a gourmet chef.
Appellant explained that he slipped and fel
Page 1 2 3 4 Arkansas Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|