Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

ARKANSAS METHODIST MEDICAL CENTER v. BLANSETT, 2013 Ark.App. 480 (2013)

Court: Court of Appeals of Arkansas Number: inarco20130911013 Visitors: 18
Filed: Sep. 11, 2013
Latest Update: Sep. 11, 2013
Summary: RITA W. GRUBER, Judge. Arkansas Methodist Medical Center Memorial Hospital and its insurer, Risk Management Resources, appeal the November 30, 2012 decision of the Arkansas Workers' Compensation Commission awarding appellee Don-Andre Blansett additional medical treatment and temporary total-disability benefits for a compensable injury to his neck. Mr. Blansett, who had previously undergone neck surgery and lower-back surgery, sustained the injury on June 7, 2011, while working for the hospital
More

RITA W. GRUBER, Judge.

Arkansas Methodist Medical Center Memorial Hospital and its insurer, Risk Management Resources, appeal the November 30, 2012 decision of the Arkansas Workers' Compensation Commission awarding appellee Don-Andre Blansett additional medical treatment and temporary total-disability benefits for a compensable injury to his neck. Mr. Blansett, who had previously undergone neck surgery and lower-back surgery, sustained the injury on June 7, 2011, while working for the hospital as an EMT and loading an obese woman onto a stretcher. In rendering its decision, the Commission specifically found that the medical treatment controverted by appellants was causally related to Mr. Blansett's compensable injury rather than a preexisting condition in his neck or cervical spine. Appellants contend on appeal that the Commission's determination is not supported by substantial evidence because Mr. Blansett's latest neck problems were related to preexisting problems rather than his compensable work injury.

Here, the Commission exercised its duty to make determinations of credibility, to weigh the evidence, and to resolve conflicts in medical testimony and evidence. Martin Charcoal, Inc. v. Britt, 102 Ark.App. 252, 284 S.W.3d 91 (2008). Because the sole issue before us concerns the sufficiency of the evidence to support the Commission's findings, and because the Commission's opinion adequately explains the decision, we affirm by memorandum opinion. In re Memorandum Opinions, 16 Ark.App. 301, 700 S.W.2d 63 (1985).

Affirmed.

PITTMAN and WYNNE, JJ., agree.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer