Hunkapillar v. Utica Mutual Insurance

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Hunkapillar v. Utica Mutual Insurance

277 S.E.2d 297, 157 Ga. App. 300, 1981 Ga. App. LEXIS 1792

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 30, 1981

Docket61203

StatusPublished

This text of 277 S.E.2d 297 (Hunkapillar v. Utica Mutual Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hunkapillar v. Utica Mutual Insurance, 277 S.E.2d 297, 157 Ga. App. 300, 1981 Ga. App. LEXIS 1792 (Ga. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

Banke, Judge.

This is a discretionary appeal from an order of the superior court reversing an award of the State Board of Workers’ Compensation. The administrative law judge heard testimony from the claimant concerning the extent of her injury and her physical incapacity, as well as conflicting medical evidence on these issues. It is undisputed that claimant injured her wrist while performing her assigned job. The injury was diagnosed variously as a “strain... possible neuritis,” or tendinitis. A lace-up splint was prescribed. Held:

The award of the State Board, while not demanded by the evidence, is supported by the evidence and must be affirmed. “Neither the superior court nor . the Court of Appeals has any authority to substitute itself as the fact finding body in lieu of the board.” Atkinson v. Home Indemnity Co., 141 Ga. App. 687 (234 SE2d 359) (1977).

Judgment reversed.

Deen, P. J., and Carley, J., concur.

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

Banke, Judge.

This is a discretionary appeal from an order of the superior court reversing an award of the State Board of Workers’ Compensation. The administrative law judge heard testimony from the claimant concerning the extent of her injury and her physical incapacity, as well as conflicting medical evidence on these issues. It is undisputed that claimant injured her wrist while performing her assigned job. The injury was diagnosed variously as a “strain... possible neuritis,” or tendinitis. A lace-up splint was prescribed. Held:

The award of the State Board, while not demanded by the evidence, is supported by the evidence and must be affirmed. “Neither the superior court nor . the Court of Appeals has any authority to substitute itself as the fact finding body in lieu of the board.” Atkinson v. Home Indemnity Co., 141 Ga. App. 687 (234 SE2d 359) (1977).

Judgment reversed.

Deen, P. J., and Carley, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

277 S.E.2d 297, 157 Ga. App. 300, 1981 Ga. App. LEXIS 1792, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hunkapillar-v-utica-mutual-insurance-gactapp-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack