CLAIM NO. E500479

JACK ESTRIDGE, EMPLOYEE, CLAIMANT v. WASTE MANAGEMENT, EMPLOYER, RESPONDENT NO. 1 TRANSPORTATION INSURANCE COMPANY, INSURANCE CARRIER, RESPONDENT NO. 1 SECOND INJURY FUND, RESPONDENT NO. 2

Before the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission
ORDER FILED NOVEMBER 13, 2001

Upon review before the FULL COMMISSION in Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas.

Claimant represented by the HONORABLE FLOYD M. THOMAS, JR., Attorney at Law, El Dorado, Arkansas.

Respondents No. 1 represented by the HONORABLE JUDY R. WILBUR, Attorney at Law, Little Rock, Arkansas.

Respondent No. 2 represented by the HONORABLE JUDY W. RUDD, Attorney at Law, Little Rock, Arkansas.

ORDER
This matter comes before the Full Commission on the respondents’ motion for reconsideration of the Full Commission’s July 16, 2001 order directing the respondents to comply with the award set forth in the prior opinion of the Administrative Law Judge filed in this case. The respondents point out that, because the Full Commission previously reversed the Administrative Law Judge’s finding that the claimant sustained a compensable injury, the Full Commission never reached the issues of claimant’s alleged permanent anatomical impairment, and whether or not the claimant proved by a preponderance of the evidence that his compensable injury was the major cause of the permanent impairment at issue. However, the respondents argue that these issues are now ripe for consideration since the Arkansas Supreme Court reversed the Full Commission and found that the claimant did prove that he sustained a compensable back injury.

After reconsideration in light of the respondents’ motion, we agree that the Full Commission has not yet made findings on the issue of claimant’s anatomical impairment and the major cause of his anatomical impairment. Moreover, we also note that the Administrative Law Judge’s findings on these issues appear to essentially be limited to a comment that “[a]t another junction during the course of the deposition, Dr. Mason elaborated on the extent of the claimant’s anatomical impairment and the basis for same.”

We vacate our July 16, 2001 order and remand this case to the Administrative Law Judge for more adequate findings on the issue of whether the claimant has proven by a preponderance of the evidence that his compensable injury is the major cause of his permanent impairment.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

______________________________ ELDON F. COFFMAN, Chairman
______________________________ MIKE WILSON, Commissioner
______________________________ SHELBY W. TURNER, Commissioner

Tagged: