 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Malvern Nursing Home v. McCallister8/29/2001
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
AFFIRMED
Malvern Nursing Center appeals a decision of the Arkansas Workers' Compensation Commission that affirmed the Administrative Law Judge's decision awarding appellee additional compensation. For reversal, appellant argues that the Commission's decision is not supported by substantial evidence inasmuch as the additional treatment awarded is not reasonably necessary in connection with the work-related injury sustained. We affirm.
On September 5, 1996, appellee suffered a compensable injury to her back when she carried a large recliner as a part of her employment with appellant. Dr. Marvin Kirk diagnosed her injury as a lumbar strain and treated appellee conservatively. Appellee filed a claim for compensation, requesting temporary total disability benefits ("TTD") and medical services. An A.L.J. found that appellee had suffered a compensable injury to her back and awarded TTD and reasonable and necessary medical treatment during the TTD period. The full Commission affirmed this decision on de novo review, stating that "she is entitled to receive whatever reasonable and necessary expenses she has incurred as a result of that injury." The Commission's decision was not appealed, and, consequently, it is now the law of the case.
Thereafter, appellee filed a claim for additional compensation, alleging that appellant had opposed additional medical treatment. In particular, appellee sought an award that would finance the medical services provided by Dr. Kirk as well as other valid referrals he had made or may make. Dr. Kirk's referrals included but were not limited to referrals to Drs. Melody St. John, a rheumatologist who had examined appellee and observed a chronic hard muscle spasm, and Alonzo Burba, who also had examined appellee and diagnosed her condition as transverse myelitis. Appellant controverted this claim, alleging that appellee's healing period had long since ended and that her physical problems were not related to the compensable injury.
At the hearing on the claim, appellee testified that she could not move without Dr. Kirk's treatments, no medical treatment had relieved her condition, and her physical conditions were generally getting worse. Furthermore, a letter dated July 15, 1998, was offered into evidence wherein Dr. Kirk opined that with regard to appellee's injury, the "back pain . . . never really stopped. . . . without . . . pain medicine, [appellee's] social functioning is non-existent." Following the hearing, the A.L.J. granted appellee's claim, concluding that "[appellee] has shown, by a preponderance of the credible evidence, that she is entitled to continued reasonably necessary medical treatment." From the full Commission's decision affirming the A.L.J.'s award comes this appeal.
On review, we affirm if the Commission's decision is supported by substantial evidence. See Ark. Code Ann. ยง 11-9-711(b)(4)(D) (Repl. 1996). A Commission's decision is supported by substantial evidence if reasonable minds could have reached the same conclusion. See Spencer v. Stone Container Corp., 72 Ark. App. 450, 453, 38 S.W.3d 909, 911 (2001).
Appellant contends that there is a lack of substantial evidence to support the Commission's decision. Specifically, it argues that the use of habituating narcotics three years following the initial work-related injury is not a reasonably necessary form of medical treatment for appellee's soft-tissue injury. In support of this argument, appellant highlights the fact that neither Dr. St. John nor Dr. Burba agreed with Dr. Kirk's diagnosis. Furthermore, appellant stresses that except for Dr. Kirk, none of the doctors that examined appellee - Drs. S
Page 1 2 Arkansas Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|