today asking you to take the courage that this bench has taken many times in workers compensation cases i stand before you with a manifest weight of the evidence question and i stand before you to ask you to show you to demonstrate to forty seven year old carpenter working for the responded for fourteen years no prior history of any shoulder problems until eighty four seventh's about seven or eight months prior to his reported injuries where he says he felt shoulder pain while working central issue in this case the facts are highly contested is whether or not he was a working foreman or whether or not he was a carpenter foreman responded to the job description and said he was a foreman he didn't do i went to trial and submitted the records on what he did in scrap metal what he did twenty to twenty seven hours of scrap metal in the year prior to his accident the subpoena was issued to the cicero scrap metal yard and those records were produced i submitted records on his prior employment with global forming in the year prior to demonstrate two thousand six hundred seventy seven hours working for of the evidence in this case turn on the commission the arbitrary arbitrators assessment of the credibility of the claim and the medical evidence they said that the claim that the commission didn't believe invest in anything he said he also felt there were problems with the medical testimony so one will become one convinced as to overrule the commission and credibility issues because in order for the commission's credibility issues to be a report and said mr poole most did not aggravate his arms on march twenty sixth or march twenty seventh mr poole most did not sustain a repetitive trauma activity claim and the last day of his employment why because his job was let's dissect that opinion on cross examination i asked dr walsh dr walsh and i cited in my greek assuming that the job description provided to you by respondent of a working foreman is inaccurate let's say assuming hypothetically that rewrite of this decision to explain their position similarly just attach the decision of you are a traitor to their two page decision an opinion on refute without going into detail to offer an explanation to use your question i submit to this court on this demonstrated time after time the guts to overturn a decision of admission provided you have sufficient basis to do so i submit to you that this is one of those cases this is a case that i proved by a that his condition was due in part to his prepared differently been active in these i had four witnesses testifying to that and i needed ph the helmet of dr walsh and he admitted that in fact if that were the case and that's what the records show that this man's condition would in fact be work related and i think the commission's reliance on dr walsh is unfounded i think his testimony was based on some mines and again and i think his testimony must be thrown out and i think on this record alone i have proven that the manifest weight of the evidence dictates that mr poole should be entitled to benefits i have yet for the respondent to show me any basis that his and his injury was before i'm asked mr nice this record i'm asking you to look at it and i'm asking you to the law is to close the benefit of having over two hundred thousand dollars in medical bills that remain outstanding paid by workers compensation and compensation for the injuries that he this is a hard working man dr chan except he's way too young to have the type of degeneration in his shoulders that he's seen he's never seen this before it's a typical it's a typical because of this man's occupation please just is this i ask you to overturn this thing that he forgot to address is the petitioners credibility counsel in his brief and again today doesn't even ask anyone to determine the petitioner was in fact credible but we wouldn't be doing it because we're not ruling out us but we don't have the terminations there is so taking a step back there is no evidence whatsoever of support petitioners allegations because he's been found to lack credibility his physician dr chad it has also been found to lack credibility council's requests evidence reweigh the medical evidence and reweigh the testimony is completely out of step with the standard of review certainly much less than the hours that he worked as a carpenter foreman that being said turning back to the idea of the repent of trauma counsel also failed to prove in any meaningful way a day on which any accident may have manifested either a traumatic an accident were repetitive accidents there is no evidence that march twenty seventh two thousand and nine was the day on which the repetitive trauma manifest if there's any evidence whatsoever i there's been no evidence against that finding and if that were true the commission's finding that the notice period was not observed fischer's friends coworkers all testified that he did not offer any evidence of injury he did not complain he never said my shoulder sir he was seen the day following his injuries there's a legit injuries working he continued to work through april the month following he wanted injuries he didn't treat until months later when you nationally treated his shoulders had five by five strength his shoulder injury magically became more severe prove able to manage a month after he stopped working there is simply no competent evidence to support any allegation that these injuries occurred while that's all i have or does any questions report that he wrote a year and a half before trial said it is not due to the acute injuries of march twenty sixth two thousand and nine or march twenty seventh two thousand and nine nor is it due to his repetitive activities of a carpenter and global warming it could however be due to activities could have contributed to the degeneration in point of shoulders bilaterally thereby requiring him to seek treatment and ultimately require surgery that's a transcript on page one thousand six hundred ninety five s a direct quote from dr walls so he says you know what if that's what he did and yeah i changed my opinion it is due to his employment and you got to go back did i prove that i offer enough evidence to show that i can bet that statement and your honors offer testimony from two of the responders witnesses that say yeah he wasn't just the foreman i offered testimony from two of mr pool of his coworkers and stood by him in the year prior and said yes he worked with us the last two days that he apparently allegedly got injured which was not that time frame because time notice wasn't given within forty five days from that date the claims are i disagree i want this court to look at duran i want you to look at three d discount i want you to look at peoria billboard all those cases which the case that goes up on a manifest weight issues so when i say i can't wait to get before your honor's it's because you've shown the guts before to dissect a case look at the four corners of the transcript diggin to the side of the commission decision  against the manifest weight of the evidence and you said before that you will not hesitate to overturn a decision of the commission if it is against the manifest weight of the evidence and i submit to you your honors that if you look at these facts and you that's why i asked you to overturn this decision and remained it back to the commission thank you very much