to the left side is that there is some discussion about whether a loss of consciousness or doubt was consciousness but the fate of the mater is the mercy room record certainly delineate what the end result is that the obviously because he speaks spanish and when you read the record and i know you haven't had summarized you reflect upon the fact that mr gutierrez a longstanding employee of the respondent is not what we would consider years that he was reliable got so what happens with mr delgado well as the record reflects he enters his way through various practitioners who conclude various findings none of whom could challenge the causal connection the relationship between his we've seen before and i know this chorus addressed this issue in fact they've used it several times in arguments of my own because i put the waddell study and the evidence together with his response when it's the zajac to be a truth predictor a truth guy of my head boy are claiming a huge amount here i wish i had a ship of the help me but i don't know so the bottom line is this let's assume for this set of facts let's assume for this gentleman see the theory then all of the doctors are right that this me n healed from this event was capable of returning to work within certain restrictions and of course dr shapiro as you know said go get him a seat and the only reason i can think of that that you shapiro would make that recommendation was he knew in his heart he knew in his mind that this guy was not capable of full duty at the age of sixty two when he finally encountered so he gets the f yes he is done in this in a way that the lineage all of the elements that are going to inhibit him from going back that was prior level of occupation and then will be whole out of nowhere despite the fake it that other doctors had so mr will be would have been aware that he was capable of working twenty miles in big if you look at his testimony says he could have been a supervisor so when he comes back to work when he goes back to work because we all know all that his old opinion of his body habitus his symptoms his condition a bill being is always going to be suspect because there's always an assumption of off that these people are fakers and families even though we were twenty five years his family was a good employee even by his own by his own bosses standards he shows up and what does he do read that you've been testimony you saw the actions that he had to do he was plastering no i don't plaster arrival paper i shudder to think of even of even attempting to do that opposed to a pure ridiculous apathy but here's the ins interesting point but discarded disregarded testimony and evidence rather of the test the simple test for determining whether or not there is a  was the mild oriented and there was a complete blockage out for fox a complete pocket that's a pretty significant cause of symptoms relating to ridiculous with ian low spine problems and again i know i'm asking for a great deal because i want you to overturn the decision of the industrial commission by the way the three commissioners than even give us any insight or any benefit of what their thoughts were with regard to medical doctor this is related to that fall off that scaffold in the body of that we have it is not really not only god's name can we parse that kind of the final line decision with regard to causal connection logic would indicate and the chain of events kind of proposal would simply say if we eliminate all of the positions for a moment and just look at logic we get the sequence of events was certainly would understand that a man who sixty years old fifty eight at the  got a third grade equivalent education because in speaking mr belmonte testified he was functionally illiterate son is faulty he worked twenty five years supporters hamley did what he what people are supposed to do but this arbitrator in deciding that he went to too many that was totally ignoring the definitive test of the mile a gram which is not controlled by anybody which clearly shows a signal a complete blockage at the l four five level how does one conclude  one has to wonder then all this goes into credibility and you know they get the flip the coin and decide which way they want to go but let's use current sense if you really trust him really invest value of his employment just tell him  upon the nature of the injuries based upon the age education level of this individual must this case must be reversed this is an unjust result and i'm not complaining about the money i'm complaining about the fact that this guy has been given no credibility whatsoever despite a pretty significant and in encouraging background given his work like that he just decide ok i'm measurement that shows he's got significant pathology which is that can we run said should be surgically reduced he's fearful of it does that mean we throw him on the heap say here some bucks hundred twenty five weeks a comp of disappear thank you you classic case your honour's of a manifest weight case it involves the commission weighing the credibility and the expertise of medical experts vocational experts and the employer and employee because there is ample evidence in the record to support the commission was what was the extent of the causal connection and the commission found clearly by its award of twenty five percent loss of the man as a whole and that petitioner did sustain injuries and this is the kind of award especially for an older case that is usually associated with the surgery which was not present here so the commission clearly took been made sure of the injuries sustained and caused by the accident seriously what the commission did not agree with was they have all of the treatment from d found none of that and that only did those treating physicians find none of it none of the diagnostic tests showed that so why our do a model they did not and i missed your honor they did not feel that in my brain was needed at that point in fact if you look at the original records the zero four five level was not even initially and bob in this will diagnostic tests showed a chronic and in five s one ridiculous there was no reference to any l four l five and parents so the commission looked on the headaches and resolved much of the lumbar issues had resolved he had only minimal tenderness and suddenly the headaches are back the cervical spine stuff is back and we have a new one part this so the commission clearly found that these were not related because  think your honor when they interpreted the l four five he backers actually said surprisingly he had very little symptomatology related to that blackett's that they were quite i think surprise that there were no particular symptoms relating to that into the first time afterwards so when you look at the complete decision by the commission you can see that they did a very careful very thorough very nuanced study of the medical evidence they also saw looked at the testimony as between the employer employee and this goes to both the temporary total disability benefits and the permanent total disability allegations which the commission rejected counsel shapiro is that he had these wide l findings he didn't know what to make of it so he said let's get an objective test i think that's the perfectly appropriate thing for a section twelve examiner to do to one as much factual information this asshole on which to base a decision so here telling you that we harassed him into coming back to work we waited till we had to defend him to determination of his abilities and we offered him a job and when you look at mr means testimony he clearly thought highly of this man he was his supervisor he ran his crew so the idea that this was a made up job the idea that they wouldn't have adjusted this job to meet restrictions isn't simply not supported by the record and instead of asking for additional complications and we have no idea what the actual facts are banter out but we only know plastering other than rather than asking for additional accommodations or to be retained the supervisor mr delgado just walks off the job and never returns on a question just practical had a job and that's the first reason the commission found he was not permanently and totally disabled the second reason is that the vocational expert testimony doesn't support our lack of finding his w peters to john lott and mr belmonte said they have placed individuals with these restrictions and yes both of them said it would be very difficult but both of them said they had done it in the past showing it could be done rather then mr belmont undertaking this process he just simply rendered an opinion that mister delgado would not be place of all but this was not based than a labor market survey it was not based on  assessment of transferable skills it was based and mr delgado was self described employment as a man well labor if you look at mr belmont t s opinions nowhere in there does it take into account his supervisory skills because they were clearly not made known to mr belmonte in order to factor that into his equation so with respect to the iraq permanent total again the record clearly supports the commission's decision the commission did look at both occasional experts opinions they did look at all of the evidence surrounding those and particularly they looked at the fact that mr delgado just walked off the job that his employer in good faith and asked me tried to provide for him for all those reasons the commission's findings with respect to permanent disability and with cause nation should be affirmed if the court has no other questions i would stand than my brief with respect to the question of reasonableness of medical and the word of t t t i would suggest your honour's that the entire decision is supported by the record it is clearly not trying to manifest weight and the circuit court's decision affirming the commission the man would be the one third tax bracket and that is earnings would not be calculated based upon an average but would reiterate really be calculated based upon what he was earning at the time so in response to the question that you posed the consul is s somebody gets hurt in this state they take a pay cut it's a burden on their family i mean that's the reality of the situation because the fact is you go back one years we know we divide by the number of weeks we averaged that we eliminate overtime we eliminate any additional funds available so right away you start out in a bad position and i think i'd be out of a traitor when you review this information especially if you look at the byplay that went under in the hearing it commentary in the award it seems to have concluded that you know what this guy is a good boss should he went back to work all i'm saying is what about his right to be healed what about his right to dictate whether or not he's capable of doing that we live in ain't that shapiro seems to imply when he ordered the  spanish he'd been there for twenty five years god knows how long his coworkers one of the witnesses didn't even see him that day or so at the beginning and were going to different apartment or different room and yet they use that testimony to try to show that this guy is real easy je