Elizabeth Bledsoe v. Viskase Companies, Inc., and Trumball Insurance Company

2020 Ark. App. 53, 593 S.W.3d 512
CourtCourt of Appeals of Arkansas
DecidedJanuary 29, 2020
StatusPublished

This text of 2020 Ark. App. 53 (Elizabeth Bledsoe v. Viskase Companies, Inc., and Trumball Insurance Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Elizabeth Bledsoe v. Viskase Companies, Inc., and Trumball Insurance Company, 2020 Ark. App. 53, 593 S.W.3d 512 (Ark. Ct. App. 2020).

Opinion

Cite as 2020 Ark. App. 53

Digitally signed by Elizabeth ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS Perry Date: 2022.08.10 13:06:54 DIVISION IV -05'00' No. CV-19-483 Adobe Acrobat version: 2022.001.20169 Opinion Delivered January 29, 2020 ELIZABETH BLEDSOE APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION V. COMMISSION [NO. G605236] VISKASE COMPANIES, INC., AND TRUMBALL INSURANCE COMPANY AFFIRMED APPELLEES

N. MARK KLAPPENBACH, Judge

Appellant Elizabeth Bledsoe appeals from the opinion of the Arkansas Workers’

Compensation Commission that affirmed and adopted the findings of fact and conclusions

of law made by the administrative law judge (ALJ) in favor of appellees. Bledsoe was

admittedly injured in a workplace accident on June 7, 2016, that caused a hairline fracture

in her sternum. The employer accepted the claim and paid benefits related to the sternum

injury. Bledsoe also sought benefits for a cervical injury that she contended she sustained in

the same accident, but she did not prevail on that aspect of her claim. On appeal, Bledsoe

contends that the findings related to the denial of her claim for cervical-injury benefits are

not supported by substantial evidence. We affirm.

Under Arkansas law, the Commission is permitted to adopt the ALJ’s opinion, and

when it does, the Commission makes the ALJ’s findings and conclusions the findings and

conclusions of the Commission. Woods v. Tyson Poultry, Inc., 2018 Ark. App. 186, 547 S.W.3d 456. In reviewing decisions from the Commission, we view the evidence and all

reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the Commission’s decision and affirm if

it is supported by substantial evidence. Skinner v. Tango Transp., Inc., 2016 Ark. App. 304,

495 S.W.3d 637. Substantial evidence is that which a reasonable mind might accept as

adequate to support a conclusion. Id. The issue is not whether this court might have reached

a different result from the Commission. Id. Additionally, questions concerning the

credibility of witnesses and the weight to be given to their testimony are within the exclusive

province of the Commission. Id. When there are contradictions in the evidence, it is within

the Commission’s province to reconcile conflicting evidence and determine the facts. Id.

Finally, this court will reverse the Commission’s decision only if it is convinced that fair-

minded persons with the same facts before them could not have reached the conclusions of

the Commission. Lybyer v. Springdale Sch. Dist., 2019 Ark. App. 77, 568 S.W.3d 805.

Bledsoe, a woman in her late forties, worked for appellee, Viskase Companies, Inc.,

a hotdog casing manufacturer. On June 7, 2016, Bledsoe was operating a machine that

pulled and rolled hotdog casings onto reels. She was manually guiding hotdog casing when

a reel fell and hit her left forearm and chest. She estimated that the part that hit her weighed

about thirty pounds. She reported the accident to her employer, which offered medical

treatment. Instead, Bledsoe sat in the break room and applied an ice pack. Bledsoe’s schedule

was three days on and then three days off, and her injury occurred on her third day of work.

By June 17, Bledsoe was still hurting, so the employer took her to the emergency room.

The June 17, 2016 emergency-room medical records indicated that Bledsoe’s chief

complaint was “chest wall pain,” and she described the pain as moderate. A CT scan

2 revealed a “linear hairline fracture” in her sternum, and physical examination indicated that

she had swelling and tenderness in her sternum, but Bledsoe’s neck had “soft, easy range of

motion,” with no tenderness or limits in range of motion. She was prescribed twelve

Tylenol with codeine to treat her sternum pain and directed to follow up with her doctor

if her symptoms did not improve in ten days. Bledsoe was placed on light duty at work.

Bledsoe presented to Dr. Thakor at Great River Medical Center on June 21 for a

follow up on her sternum injury. She complained of sternum pain that was not well

controlled by her prescription medication. She also complained of upper back and neck

pain. Dr. Thakor noted tenderness and spasm in the cervical region. She was prescribed pain

and muscle-spasm medications.

On June 28, Bledsoe presented to her family doctor, Dr. Cullom, complaining of

ankle swelling. She told Dr. Cullom about her chest injury; there was no mention of neck

pain or spasms, either by patient history or by physical examination.

Bledsoe was referred to an orthopedic specialist, Dr. Yao, to follow up on her

sternum injury, and Dr. Yao saw her several times starting in August 2016. Dr. Yao

diagnosed her with the clavicle fracture and, given Bledsoe’s complaints of neck and back

tenderness, a cervical and thoracic strain. A September 2016 MRI of her cervical spine

showed mild degenerative spondylosis and a small disc protrusion at C5-6. Nerve-

conduction studies revealed no nerve injury. Also in September 2016, Dr. Yao determined

that Bledsoe’s sternal fracture had healed. Dr. Yao relied on Bledsoe’s statements at the first

clinical visit in August 2016 in opining that her neck problem was causally connected to her

work accident.

3 Bledsoe continued on light duty at work, but her last day of work was December 2,

2016. Thereafter, she received six months of short-term disability benefits and then

commenced a two-year period of long-term disability benefits.

Bledsoe was treated by Dr. Abraham, a neurosurgeon, beginning in April 2017, ten

months after the work accident. Dr. Abraham performed a carpal-tunnel release surgery on

her left hand in August 2017. Dr. Abraham’s medical notes indicated that Bledsoe also

complained of neck and shoulder pain, which she attributed to the June 2016 work accident.

Dr. Abraham consequently attributed her neck and shoulder pain to the work accident based

on Bledsoe’s explanation. Her cervical problem did not require a surgical intervention; Dr.

Abraham recommended physical therapy. Dr. Abraham opined in a letter that Bledsoe’s

neck pain was caused by the work accident.

Dr. Yao was unaware of what Bledsoe’s earlier medical records disclosed until he was

deposed in March 2018. Dr. Yao was advised of the information gathered in her first visit

to the emergency room ten days after the work accident, which had particular assessments

about her neck and cervical region showing no complaints or objective signs of cervical

injury. With that knowledge, Dr. Yao stated that, as to what was seen on the September

2016 MRI, it was “not possible to determine if maybe it’s degenerative or perhaps

traumatic.” Dr. Yao ultimately stated his opinion that her cervical problem was not related

to the workplace accident unless the earlier medical records could be clarified or edited by

those medical providers.

Dr. Abraham was deposed in April 2018 and was presented with Bledsoe’s earlier

medical records. At that point, Dr. Abraham acknowledged that he could not identify the

4 cause of the cervical problem, stating that it could be degenerative or could be related to

trauma. Nonetheless, Dr. Abraham stood by his opinion that, given Bledsoe’s statements

to him, he thought her neck pain was related to the work accident. He said that Bledsoe’s

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Skinner v. Tango Transport, Inc.
2016 Ark. App. 304 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2016)
Kiswire Pine Bluff, Inc. v. Segars
549 S.W.3d 410 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2018)
Ark. Health Ctr. v. Burnett
558 S.W.3d 408 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2018)
Webb v. Wal-Mart Assocs., Inc.
2018 Ark. App. 627 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2018)
Lybyer v. Springdale Sch. Dist.
2019 Ark. App. 77 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2019)
Woods v. Tyson Poultry, Inc.
547 S.W.3d 456 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2018)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2020 Ark. App. 53, 593 S.W.3d 512, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/elizabeth-bledsoe-v-viskase-companies-inc-and-trumball-insurance-arkctapp-2020.