 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Methodist Nursing Home v. Travis2/23/2005
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
Appellant, Methodist Nursing Home, challenges the finding of the Arkansas Workers' Compensation Commission that appellee, Felicia Travis, sustained a compensable low-back injury while working for appellant. Further, appellant argues that the Commission erred in concluding that appellant's claim for benefits was not barred under the doctrines enunciated in Shippers Transp. of Ga. v. Stepp, 265 Ark. 365, 578 S.W.2d 232 (1979), and in Thompson v. Washington Reg. Med. Ctr., 71 Ark. App. 126, 27 S.W.3d 459 (2000). We affirm.
In addressing appellant's first issue, we note that a compensable injury is an accidental injury arising out of and in the course of employment. Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-102(4)(A)(i) (Supp. 2003). A compensable injury must be established by medical evidence supported by objective findings. Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-102(4)(D) (Supp. 2003). "Objective findings" are findings that "cannot come under the voluntary control of the patient." Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-102(16) (Supp. 2003). The claimant has the burden of proving his compensable injury by a preponderance of the evidence. Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-102(4)(E)(i) (Supp. 2003). If an injury is caused by a specific incident and is identifiable by time and place of occurrence, then the injury is "accidental," and it is not necessary that the claimant prove that the injury was the major cause of the disability or need for treatment. Estridge v. Waste Mgmt., 343 Ark. 276, 33 S.W.3d 167 (2000); Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-102(4)(E)(i) (Supp. 2003). We view the evidence in a light most favorable to the Commission's decision, and we uphold that decision if it is supported by substantial evidence. Id.
Here, appellee testified that on November 20, 2001, she began working for appellant. Her job duties included caring for patients, and in particular, she had to lift the patients. Appellee stated that she did not have problems with her back while working for appellant until January 30, 2002. On that day, she went into one patient's room to move a patient from a recliner to his bed. As she picked him up, he stiffened and began to slide. When she twisted around to put him back into the recliner, she injured her lower back and felt pain there and in her right leg. She reported the injury to a nurse and went to see a physician the next day. After four days off, she returned to work on light-duty status despite continuing to have back problems. She was again placed on regular duty, and on March 13, 2002, she was assisting another patient into bed when the patient grabbed her around the neck and pulled her down. She felt pain in the same places as before, and she considered it to be a continuation of the same problem that she had on January 30, 2002. She reported her injury immediately. An MRI was performed on March 26, 2002, that showed appellee had a "moderate size central disc herniation at the L3-4 level causing canal stenosis." The MRI results differed from an MRI performed on November 16, 1999, which showed a " mall central disc protrusion" at L3-4 with "no spinal canal or foraminal stenosis" and an MRI performed on March 30, 2000, which showed at L3-4 a "degenerated disc, with an annular tear and a small moderate central disc protrusion" that was "similar" to the November 16, 1999, study.
In arguing that there was not substantial evidence that appellee sustained a compensable injury, appellant states that there were no witnesses to the injury, that there was no specific injury caused by a specific incident, and that appellee's need for medical care pre-existed the injury. With regard to this latter contention, appellant notes that appellee had back problems that preceded the January 30, 2002, incident.
Page 1 2 3 Arkansas Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|