Court Opinion

ID: 9764041
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 03:08:36.424426+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:29:52.805662
License: Public Domain

Marian F. Penix, Judge, dissenting. In reviewing the record I find the third factor required by Shippers Transport of Georgia v. Stepp, 265 Ark. 365 (1979) to be present. The record supports the finding there was a causal connection between the Claimant’s false representation and her injury. The Claimant testified Dr. Thomas Fletcher treated her for an injury to her left arm in 1969 and she drew 5% disability. She testified Dr. Fletcher told her to avoid heavy lifting and to avoid employment or activity that involved continuous (use of) hands, wrists and shoulders. At the time of the Claimant’s July 9, 1977 injury she was doing heavy lifting in the process of cleaning the plant. By her own testimony, when Dr. Fletcher performed the surgery November 10, 1969, to correct carpal tunnel syndrome he warned against heavy lifting and repetitive wrist motion. At that time Dr. Fletcher learned the Claimant had mild cervical osteo-arthritis which was aggravated by exertion and heavy lifting. The Claimant testified she injured her right hand and avoided injury to her left hand “because I was protecting it.” The majority relies upon Shippers Transport of Georgia v. Stepp, supra. That case was remanded by the Supreme Court to the Commission for further findings in accordance with the third required factor. ... As to the third factor, i.e., a causal connection between the false representation and the present injury the appellants argue it is common knowledge that appellee’s three previous back injuries left him with a weakened back which is prone to serious injury. However, according to appellee, he was advised by his doctor that he was in good physical condition to do manual labor (he had back surgery in each injury), he had no back limitation, and he had worked for the past 6 years as a mechanic without incident until this injury occurred. The case at hand is distinguishable. Unlike the claimant in Shippers Ms. Baldwin herself testified she had been told by Dr. Fletcher to avoid lifting and repetitive use of her left wrist. The Claimant herself provided the evidence which the Commission found to be substantial to support its finding there was a causal connection between the misrepresentation and the current injury. For this court to hold otherwise amounts to rewarding an employee who has deliberately lied and deceived her employer in order to obtain employment. Shippers Transport, supra, does not require such an illogical, inequitable and unjust result. I respectfully dissent. Newbern, J., authorizes me to state he joins in this dissent.