Arkansas: Commission Has Substantial Discretion in Weighing Medical Evidence

The Workers’ Compensation Commission did not err in finding that claimant had sustained a compensable injury to his left big toe where the employee, a diabetic, testified that in performing his work duties, coolant constantly spilled onto his feet, soaking his boots and socks, that the coolant affected the performance of his boots, that he noticed a small blister on his toe, notified his supervisor, sought medical attention and, some time later had to undergo surgery to amputate the toe. The court acknowledged that a compensable injury must be established by medical evidence supported by objective findings. The court added that the treating physician’s notes constituted sufficient objective findings to support the claim. The employer argued that the physician had checked a box on the medical form indicating the injury was not work-related. The court said that the Commission could weigh all the medical evidence and come to a conclusion as to causation. It added that objective medical evidence was not always essential to establish the causal relationship between the injury and a work-related accident where objective medical evidence established the existence and extent of the injury, and a preponderance of other nonmedical evidence established a causal relation to a work-related incident. To require medical proof of causation in every case would be out of line with the general policy of economy and efficiency contained within the workers’ compensation law.

Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the Feature National Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter, is the co-author of Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law (LexisNexis).

LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance.

See St. Jean Indus. v. Ezell, 2016 Ark. App. 516, 2016 Ark. App. LEXIS 562 (Nov. 2, 2016)

See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 128.05.

Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law