Court Opinion

ID: 9767773
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 05:26:33.189274+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:30:32.863165
License: Public Domain

John E. Jennings, Judge, dissenting. While I agree that the Commission may not, on remand, change its findings of fact, I do not agree that the Commission’s opinion fails to display a substantial basis for the denial of the relief sought. See Linithicum v. Mar-Bax Shirt Co., 23 Ark. App. 26, 741 S.W.2d 275 (1987). Mr. Lunsford suffered a herniated disc in 1985 and underwent a laminectomy. In 1986 he suffered a “reoccurrence” of the herniated disc and underwent a second laminectomy. After the second surgery he continued to suffer from severe back pain. The Commission might reasonably decide, as it did, that regardless of any conversations between the claimant and his doctor, the undertaking of a “long sojourn on horseback” was an unreasonable activity under the circumstances so as to break the chain of causation between Mr. Lunsford’s compensable injury and his subsequent spinal fracture. I respectfully dissent. Cracraft, C.J., joins in this dissent.