CLAIM NO. E608440
Before the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission
OPINION FILED SEPTEMBER 24, 1997
Upon review before the FULL COMMISSION, Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas.
Claimant represented by JIM BURTON, Attorney at Law, Jonesboro, Arkansas.
Respondent represented by NEAL HART, Attorney at Law, Little Rock, Arkansas.
Decision of Administrative Law Judge: Reversed
[1] OPINION AND ORDER
[2] Respondent appeals from a decision of the Administrative Law Judge filed January 27, 1997, finding that claimant sustained a compensable injury arising out of and in the course of her employment with respondent during the latter part of July, 1995. Based upon our de novo review of the entire record, we find that claimant has failed to meet her burden of proof. Therefore, we reverse the decision of the Administrative Law Judge.
arm. Claimant even testified that four or five days after the incident occurred she noticed that her left hand was darker in color. Although claimant alleges to have advised her co-workers of the alleged incident, claimant did not call her co-workers to testify on her behalf to corroborate her story. [7] In our opinion, the medical evidence submitted at the hearing simply does not support claimant’s allegations of an injury to herleft hand in either July or August of 1995. The medical records of Dr. Page, Dr. Hazzard, and radiologist Edwin Byrd all indicate that claimant was being treated for symptoms to her right hand during the summer and fall of 1995. Had all medical records during this time frame indicated treatment to claimant’s left hand with the exception of only one medical care provider inadvertently stating that treatment was to claimant’s right hand, we might be persuaded by claimant’s argument that the medical care providers simply made a mistake in their records. However, this alleged mistake was not made once by one physician but, if claimant’s testimony is to be believed it, was made at least eight times throughout the medical records of Dr. Page, Dr. Hazzard, and radiologist Byrd. Moreover, when claimant first sought medical treatment for either of her hands, Dr. Page specifically noted “no hx of direct trauma.” In addition although claimant alleges that her hand had changed colors after the lifting incident Dr. Page reported “no color or temp change.” Finally, claimant adamantly maintained during questioning that she advised each of her medical care providers of the lifting incident at work, however nowhere in the medical records is there any report of the alleged incident. To the contrary, the medical reports are consistent with claimant denying a history of direct trauma. [8] It was not until the fall of 1996, over one year after the alleged incident to claimant’s left hand that the medical records first document any treatment to claimant’s left upper extremity. Dr. Kip Owen in his August 29, 1996, medical report does not indicate problems with claimant’s hands but rather a complaint of left arm pain. Dr. Owen focused his examination of claimant on claimant’s shoulder and left upper extremity. He did not examine claimant’s left hand. [9] Whether claimant is a poor historian unable to remember the exact date of her injury to her left hand is not the major issue in this case. Rather, the issue is whether claimant has proven by preponderance of the evidence that she sustained an injury to her left hand in July or August of 1995 which arose out of and during the course of her employment. After reviewing claimant’s testimony, and the medical records in this case we cannot find that claimant has met her burden of proof. The medical records prepared contemporaneously with claimant’s alleged injury do not support a finding that claimant actually injured her left hand. In fact, the medical records indicate that claimant sought treatment for her right hand for no known history of trauma and without providing any history of a lifting incident at work. In fact it is even questionable whether the first medical treatment sought occurred before or after claimant’s alleged incident. Without giving claimant the benefit of the doubt, and without assuming that the medical care providers particularly Dr. Page, Dr. Hazzard and radiologist Byrd each made the same mistake on at least eight different occasions noting treatment to claimant’s right hand, we cannot find that claimant actually sustained an injury to her left hand. Therefore, we reverse the decision of the Administrative Law Judge. [10] IT IS SO ORDERED.
ELDON F. COFFMAN, Chairman MIKE WILSON, Commissioner
[11] Commissioner Humphrey dissents.