Harding v. Carolina Adjustments

Opinion

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS 
PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Supreme Court

Nathan Harding, Employee, Respondent,

v.

Carolina Adjustments, Employer, and Princeton Insurance Company, Carrier, Appellants.

---

Appeal From Richland County
 Reginald I. Lloyd, Circuit Court Judge

---

Opinion No.  2006-MO-023
Heard May 3, 2006 – Filed May 30, 2006 

---

AFFIRMED

---

E. Ros Huff, Jr., and Elizabeth F. Render, both of Huff Law Firm, LLC, of Irmo, for appellants.

Thomas Pinckney Bellinger and Stephen B. Samuels, both of McWhirter, Bellinger & Associates, of Columbia, for respondent.

---

PER CURIAM:  Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities:  Issue I:  Adams v. Texfi Indus., 341 S.C. 401, 535 S.E.2d 124 (2000) (workers’ compensation commission’s factual findings will not be overturned unless they are clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on the whole record); Issue II:  Last v. MSI Constr. Co., 305 S.C. 349, 409 S.E.2d 334 (1991) (loss of earning capacity caused by the physical injury is the pertinent measure of compensable disability); Hendricks v. Pickens County, 335 S.C. 405, 517 S.E.2d 698 (Ct. App. 1999) (temporary total disability benefits are available from date of injury through date of maximum medical improvement).

AFFIRMED.

TOAL, C.J., MOORE, WALLER, BURNETT and PLEICONES, JJ., concur.