CRISWELL v. TYSON FOODS, INC., 1997 AWCC 194

CLAIM NO. E317687

NAPOLEON CRISWELL, EMPLOYEE, CLAIMANT v. TYSON FOODS, INC., SELF-INSURED EMPLOYER, RESPONDENT

Before the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission
OPINION FILED APRIL 23, 1997

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

Claimant represented by the HONORABLE LAURA J. McKINNON, Attorney at Law, Fayetteville, Arkansas.

Respondents represented by the HONORABLE EARL “BUDDY” CHADICK, Attorney at Law, Fayetteville, Arkansas.

Decision of Administrative Law Judge: Vacated and Remanded.

[1] OPINION AND ORDER
[2] The claimant appeals an opinion and order filed by the administrative law judge on July 11, 1996. In that opinion and order, the administrative law judge found that the claimant has failed to rebut the presumption that the presence of alcohol, as confirmed by appropriate testing, substantially occasioned his accident and resulting injury.

[3] The claimant was involved in a slip and fall incident at work on February 5, 1993. A blood-alcohol sample tested after the incident contained 0.14% alcohol. [4] As the administrative law judge noted, the provisions of Act 796 of 1993 substantially changed the statutory presumptions and burden of proof for injuries involving the presence of alcohol in the body. However, since the incident which allegedly caused the claimant’s injuries occurred before July 1, 1993, the provisions of Act 796 of 1993 do not apply to this claim for benefits. [5] Therefore, we vacate the administrative law judge’s findings and conclusions made pursuant to the provisions of Act 796 of 1993, and we remand this claim to the administrative law judge to make additional findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to the provisions of the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Law as it existed prior to Act 796 of 1993. [6] IT IS SO ORDERED.

ELDON F. COFFMAN, Chairman PAT WEST HUMPHREY, Commissioner

[7] Commissioner Wilson concurs.

[8] CONCURRING OPINION
[9] I concur with the majority’s opinion and order remanding this case to the Administrative Law Judge to make additional findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to the provision of the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation law as it existed prior to the amendments of Act 796 of 1993. However, I write this concurring opinion to explain why I find that this is an “old law” case. In my opinion, the old law applies since the claimant’s injury occurred on February 5, 1993, and the parties stipulated that medical benefits and temporary total disability benefits were paid up through February 19, 1993, when the claim was controverted. Claimant received both medical benefits and temporary total disability benefits for his injury prior to the effective date of Act 796 of 1993. Accordingly, I find that Act 796 of 1993 is inapplicable.

[10] MIKE WILSON, Commissioner