 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Sanderson v. Porta-Fab Corp.3/9/1999
This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.
Appeal From: Labor and Industrial Relations Commission
Opinion Summary:
Porta-Fab Corporation and Amerisure Companies (collectively, "Employer") appeal from a Temporary or Partial Award of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission finding that Gerald Sanderson ("Claimant") met his burden of proving an accident arising out of and in the course of employment, awarding temporary total disability for 48 weeks and ordering Employer to provide treatment until Claimant reaches maximum medical improvement. On appeal, Employer denies liability for the payment of any compensation, arguing that the facts found by the Commission do not support the Award and that there was not sufficient and competent evidence in the record to warrant making the award.
AFFIRMED.
Division Two holds:
Even if a testifying physician fails to use the exact words of section 287.020.3, RSMo 1994, and thus never specifically states that the work-related accident was a "substantial factor" in causing the claimant's injury, the Court will affirm the Commission's award if there is substantial evidence upon which to base the award. In this case, the Commission's finding that Claimant's June 10, 1996 work-related accident was a substantial factor in causing his injury is supported by competent and substantial evidence and is not contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
Opinion Vote: AFFIRMED. Dowd, P.J., and Crahan, J., concur.
Opinion
Porta-Fab Corporation and Amerisure Companies (collectively, "Employer") appeal from a Temporary or Partial Award of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission finding that Gerald Sanderson ("Claimant") met his burden of proving an accident arising out of and in the course of employment, awarding temporary total disability for 48 weeks and ordering Employer to provide treatment until Claimant reaches maximum medical improvement. On appeal, Employer denies liability for the payment of any compensation, arguing that the facts found by the Commission do not support the Award and that there was not sufficient and competent evidence in the record to warrant making the award. We affirm.
Standard of Review
The Commission is the ultimate trier of fact in workers' compensation cases. Counts v. John Fabick Tractor Co., 745 S.W.2d 839, 840 (Mo.App. E.D. 1988). It is the sole Judge of the weight of the evidence and credibility of the witnesses. Welborn v. Southern Equipment Co., 395 S.W.2d 119, 126 (Mo.banc 1965). It is in the Commission's sole discretion to determine the weight to be given expert opinions, and that cannot be reviewed by this Court. Cahall v. Cahall, 963 S.W.2d 368, 371 (Mo.App. E.D. 1998). Our review is limited to determining whether the Commission's award is supported by competent and substantial evidence. Kintz v. Schnucks Markets, Inc., 889 S.W.2d 121, 123 (Mo.App. E.D. 1994); Willis v. Jewish Hospital, 854 S.W.2d 82, 84 (Mo.App.E.D.1993). This Court views all evidence and inferences in a light most favorable to the award and will not substitute its judgment for that of the Commission, even if this Court would have made a different initial Conclusion. Hunsperger v. Poole Truck Lines, Inc., 886 S.W.2d 656, 658, (Mo.App. E.D. 1994). In examining the record, we must liberally construe all provisions of the Workers' Compensation Act to resolve all doubts in favor of the employee. Cook v. Sunnen Products Corp., 937 S.W.2d 221, 224 (Mo.App. E.D. 1996) (citations omitted).
Factual and Procedural Background
Claimant has worked
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Missouri Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|