Title: McDaniel v. Hilyard Drilling Co.

State: arkansas

Issuer: Arkansas Supreme Court

Document:

343 S.W.2d 416 (1961) Cleo Tommy McDANIEL, Appellant, v. HILYARD DRILLING CO. et al., Appellees. No. 5-2294. Supreme Court of Arkansas. February 13, 1961. Rehearing Denied March 20, 1961. *417 McMath, Leatherman, Woods & Youngdahl, Little Rock, for appellant. Shackleford & Shackleford, El Dorado, for appellees. JOHNSON, Justice. This is a workmen's compensation case. It is undisputed that appellant-claimant Cleo Tommy McDaniel injured his back when he fell from a water truck while working for appellee-respondent Hilyard Drilling Company on February 7, 1958. The only controversy between the parties is the amount of permanent partial disability due appellant. Appellees contend that appellant is only entitled to 10% permanent partial disability and not 20% as sought by appellant. By agreement of counsel this case was submitted on the medical reports furnished by five physicians who had examined appellant. The first doctor to see appellant was Dr. William J. Hutchison of Tallahassee, Florida. Dr. Hutchison's narrative report of April 16, 1958, stated that McDaniel, according to his history, had never had a previous back injury. He further stated that at the time of the report the claimant McDaniel had a mechanically unstable back and, "I believe he will continue to have back pain if he tries to do heavy work." Dr. Hutchison went on to say: The claimant was next examined by Dr. Charles G. Smith, Texarkana, Texas, on October 4, 1958, and Dr. Smith rendered a report on October 21, 1958. After setting forth the details of the accident of February 7, 1958, Dr. Smith's report states, "He has no previous history of back complaints." Dr. Smith went on to further state: In his report of February 9, 1959, Dr. Smith stated in a letter to the insurance carrier: "The question you pose is indeed a difficult one. Obviously, the congenital anomaly of the back and the leg length discrepancy pre-existed his present complaints. According to his statement these variations from normal *418 caused him no symptoms and he was not conscious of either existing; however, I feel that they did contribute in that they predisposed him to his present complaints. Dr. J. C. Caden of Jackson, Mississippi, examined claimant on March 3, 1959, and stated that he had a permanent partial disability of 20% to the body as a whole. Dr. Caden stated: "This is based on aggravation of a pre-existing condition since this no doubt was of congenital origin." Dr. Jack H. Phillips of Natchez, Mississippi, examined the claimant on April 1, 1959, and rendered a report dated April 4, 1959. Dr. Phillips in his report stated: In a supplemental report rendered on April 7, 1959, Dr. Phillips stated as follows: At the request of the Workmen's Compensation Referee, Dr. John M. Hundley saw the claimant on January 29, 1960. Dr. Hundley's report on that date states: "The patient denies previous trouble with his back." Dr. Hundley goes on to say in the portion of his report labeled "opinion": On the basis of the above-mentioned medical reports, the Commission found that the claimant had a 20% disability to the body as a whole but the Commission allocated 10% of this disability to the latent congenital anomaly of the man's back, which predisposed him to the injury occurring on February 7, 1958. Compensation was thus only allowed for 10% permanent partial disability or 45 weeks. The claimant appealed to circuit court contending that the permanent partial disability should not have been reduced because of the congenital anomaly. The circuit court affirmed the Commission and the claimant now brings his appeal to this Court. For reversal, appellant contends that: "Where a latent congenital defect is triggered by an accident, the entire resulting permanent disability is compensable." Appellees' contention is that: "factually appellant's pre-existing condition was not latent, but obviously and necessarily produced some degree of disability before the accident and continued to operate as a source of disability after the accident. They further contended before the Commission, and do so now, that any award of compensation must be limited solely to the disability produced by the injury and the prior congenital defect was not compensable." On the other hand, appellant argues that: "If the insurance carrier's physicians, who make 90 per cent of the disability evaluations on claimants, are given the legal license to assign a portion of permanent disability to latent pre-existing conditions, the Workmen's Compensation Act has been wrecked in this State as far as claimants are concerned." Both appellant and appellees, in order to sustain their conflicting contentions, rely principally upon the following subsections of Sec. 59, Vol. 2, Larson's Workmen's Compensation Law, pages 54 and 58: We agree with the logic of the general rule relative to apportionment as set forth above from Larson, and inasmuch as this is a case of first impression in Arkansas, we adopt it as our own. Arkansas is not one of the states referred to by Dean Larson as "having special statutes on aggravation of disease." The word "latent" is defined in Black's Law Dictionary as follows: *420 "Hidden; concealed; dormant; that does not appear upon the face of a thing." Therefore, after carefully examining the limited record before us, we find that there is no substantial evidence to support a conclusion that the abnormality appellant may have had prior to the injury here complained of was not latent. Accordingly, the judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded to the Circuit Court with directions to remand to the Workmen's Compensation Commission for entry of an award for 20% disability.