 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority v. Bridges9/23/2005
ANDREWS, P. J., PHIPPS and MIKELL, JJ.
Pursuant to our grant of its application for discretionary appeal, Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) appeals from the superior court's order affirming the Appellate Division's affirmance of ALJ Badcock-Hagler's ruling that MARTA had improperly reduced and then stopped the temporary total disability payments of employee Hoyle Bridges.
In reviewing a workers' compensation award, both this court and the superior court must construe the evidence in the light most favorable to the party prevailing before the appellate division. It is axiomatic that the findings of the State Board of Workers' Compensation, when supported by any evidence, are conclusive and binding, and that neither the superior court nor this court has any authority to substitute itself as a fact finding body in lieu of the Board.
(Footnote omitted.) Mayor & Aldermen of the City of Savannah v. Stevens, 261 Ga. App. 694, 695 (583 SE2d 553) (2003), rev'd on other ground, 278 Ga. 166 (598 SE2d 456) (2004).
So viewed, the facts are that Hoyle Bridges, a long time employee of MARTA, aggravated pre-existing problems in his right knee and back while lifting a coin box and stepping off a bus on October 24, 2001. MARTA accepted the injuries as compensable and Bridges was first examined by Dr. Dawkins, who released Bridges for return to light duty work on November 9, 2001. A WC-104 to this effect was filed with the Board. On January 9, 2002, Dr. Bernot performed knee surgery on Bridges' right knee and released him to regular duty in April 2002. Pursuant to that release, MARTA filed a WC-2, with Dr. Bernot's release attached, asserting that Bridges had undergone a change in condition for the better and suspended Bridges' temporary total disability payments. Bridges requested a hearing, contending his condition had not changed for the better and seeking reinstatement of temporary total disability benefits as well as a change of authorized treating physician. A hearing was held before ALJ Connor on September 5, 2002, and an award was issued on November 1, 2002. In that award, which is res judicata in this case, Judge Connor concluded that Bridges' condition had not changed for the better and he was entitled to temporary total disability benefits retroactive to April 5, 2002, when they originally ceased, continuing forward. The award also ordered a change in authorized treating physician to Dr. Kingloff "for [Bridges'] work-related injuries from this date forward." The award also found that Dr. Bernot had not treated Bridges' back problems, only his knee. MARTA acknowledges that, since November 1, 2002, Dr. Kingloff was Bridges authorized treating physician. In addition, the award established that Bridges had been capable only of sedentary work since the 2001 accident.
On January 21, 2003, MARTA unilaterally reduced Bridges' income benefits under OCGA § 34-9-104 (a) (2) to temporary partial disability payments. This reduction was premised on the WC-104 which MARTA based on Dr. Bernot's conclusions about Bridges' condition in February 2002.
On July 21, 2003, MARTA suspended all income payments to Bridges based on its claim that aggravation of his condition by work had ceased. OCGA § 34-9-1 (4).
Bridges requested a hearing which was conducted by ALJ Badcock- Hagler in August 2003, on the issues of benefit reduction and suspension. In her ruling of December 10, 2003, Badcock-Hagler found that the reduction and suspension of benefits were improper and that Bridges was entitled to recommencement of temporary total disability payments. She also specifically found that "the employer/self insurer has failed to prove complia
Page 1 2 3 4 Georgia Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|