Opinion ID: 1948535
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Did the lower court err in upholding the award of the Mississippi Workmen's Compensation Commission for additional temporary total, medical and permanent partial disability benefits from and after March 1, 1978?

Text: The gist of Emerson's argument on this point centers upon whether McLarty's debilitation  at least that which continued after March 1, 1978  was caused by the December 8, 1977, work-related injury. Emerson adverts to the fact that on March 1, 1978, McLarty was released by her physician to return to work and, in fact did so. The implication that Emerson makes is that any continuing back problem experienced by McLarty was caused, not by the 1977 work-related mishap, but by the injury to her shoulder and neck sustained in the automobile accident of April, 1978. Despite Emerson's assertions to the contrary, both doctors who testified did indicate that the 1977 accident was causative of McLarty's condition. In mitigation of those statements, one doctor did testify to the possibility that the subsequent accident might have been the reason for her later inability to work; however, this testimony was elicited only as a response to a hypothetical question. This assignment is controlled by the rationale employed in the first assignment; to-wit: (1) That compensation statutes should be given a liberal construction and doubtful cases resolved in favor of compensation; Evans, 372 So.2d at 269; and, (2) An order of the Workers' Compensation Commission will be affirmed if it is supported by substantial evidence. Olen Burrage Trucking Co., 475 So.2d at 439.