Saline Cnty. Judge v. Crouch
This text of 2013 Ark. App. 589 (Saline Cnty. Judge v. Crouch) 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.
Opinion
Cite as 2013 Ark. App. 589
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION I No. CV-13-527
SALINE COUNTY JUDGE and AAC Opinion Delivered October 23, 2013 RISK MANAGEMENT SERVICES APPELLANTS APPEAL FROM THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION V. COMMISSION [NO. G110162]
THOMAS CROUCH APPELLEE AFFIRMED
BRANDON J. HARRISON, Judge
The Saline County Judge and AAC Risk Management Services appeal the Arkansas
Workers’ Compensation Commission’s order finding that Thomas Crouch suffered a
compensable injury and was entitled to additional medical treatment. Specifically, the
Commission ruled that Crouch, who had previously undergone back surgery, sustained a
compensable injury, while working for the Sardis Volunteer Fire Department, after he and
other firefighters lifted a small wall to put out a fire. At one point during his treatment for
the compensable injury, Crouch reported feeling a “pull” in his back after bending over to
pick up his son. The Commission determined that the physical therapist’s notes indicating
“decrease lumbar lordosis” constituted the necessary objective medical findings for a
compensable injury. The Commission also found that Crouch’s bending over to pick up his
son was not unreasonable conduct under the circumstances. Appellants argue that the
Commission’s decision was not supported by substantial evidence given the lack of objective Cite as 2013 Ark. App. 589
findings and the presence of an independent intervening injury.
The Commission exercised its duty to make determinations of credibility, weigh the
evidence, and resolve any conflicting medical testimony and other evidence. Ark. Methodist
Med. Ctr. v. Blansett, 2013 Ark. App. 480. Because the Commission’s opinion adequately
explains its decision, and that decision is supported by substantial evidence, we affirm by
memorandum opinion. In re Memorandum Opinions, 16 Ark. App. 301, 700 S.W.2d 63
(1985).
Affirmed.
GRUBER and WHITEAKER, JJ., agree.
Michael E. Ryburn, for appellants.
The McNeely Law Firm, PLLC, by: Steven R. McNeely, for appellee.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2013 Ark. App. 589, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/saline-cnty-judge-v-crouch-arkctapp-2013.