STULL v. PACE INDUSTRIES, INC., 2001 AWCC 104

CLAIM NO. E905210

RANDY R. STULL, EMPLOYEE, CLAIMANT v. PACE INDUSTRIES, INC., SELF-INSURED EMPLOYER, RESPONDENT

Before the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission
OPINION FILED MAY 10, 2001

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

Claimant represented by HONORABLE JASON WATSON, Attorney at Law, Fayetteville, Arkansas.

Respondent represented by HONORABLE JAMES D. SPROTT, Attorney at Law, Harrison, Arkansas.

Decision of Administrative Law Judge: Affirmed.

OPINION AND ORDER
Respondent appeals an October 18, 2000 opinion of the Administrative Law Judge finding that claimant has proved by a preponderance of the evidence that he sustained compensable carpal tunnel syndrome and that he is entitled to benefits for a permanent anatomical impairment of 10% to the left upper extremity.

Claimant is not required under the provisions of Act 796 of 1993 to establish that his work duties involved rapid repetitive motion as an element of his claim. Kildow v. Baldwin Piano and Organ, 333 Ark. 335, 969 S.W.2d 190 (1998). However, claimant must still establish that his carpal tunnel syndrome injury arose out of and in the course of his employment, that the work-related injury is the major cause of his disability or need for medical treatment, and claimant must establish the compensable injury with objective medical findings. Id. Respondent’s argument on appeal is that claimant has failed to prove the requisite causal connection. After our de novo review of the entire record, we find that claimant has met his burden of proof and accordingly, affirm the opinion of the Administrative Law Judge.

At the time claimant first sought treatment for his left upper extremity on March 19, 1999, he had been a forklift operator for approximately three and a half years for this employer. Claimant described the motions required to operate a forklift in the following manner:

Q Okay. In the operation of the forklift, what’s required to accomplish the movements in the loading of the trucks?
A Well, each truck consists of anywhere from 42 to about 63 pallets of parts. And I pull those pallets out of a specific row where they’re inventoried and bring them to the front where they, and then I set them up in the QC area. And once I pull them, I bring them up to the front; I set them all up so they can be looked at. Then once they’re approved for shipping, then I stack them up and I put them in the trailers.

Q Do you work in specifically one warehouse?

A Yes.

Q Is that environmentally controlled? Are you working outdoors?
A Yeah, it’s, it’s an indoor, large warehouse, roughly 400 by 400.
Q Okay. Are the pallets — how many trucks would you load on an average in a shift?
A During the, during our busy seasons, I’ll load anywhere from six to seven, eight trucks a night.

Q And how many pallets are typically on each truck?

A Right now, just about everything is going 63 pallets to a truck.
Q Okay. What is the, is there a standard distance you might drive from pulling the finished product to QC to loading it on the truck?
A Well, the furtherest point in the warehouse would be probably about 400 feet, and then set up again. QC area is roughly a 50 by 50 area in the corner of the warehouse where a QC member inspects the parts and verifies their shipment.
Q To operate this hydraulic and power steering forklift, what are the physical requirements of your upper extremities and what do you use, or which controls do you operate with each hand?
A All the steering and forward and reverse is done with my left hand. And the hydraulics, the levers are all done with my right hand.

Q The levers meaning the lifters and —

A The, to operate the mast, right.

Q — tilts? Okay. Is the steering, this power steering, is it on the same ratio as, for lack of a better term, if you turn the steering two inches, does it turn the tire two inches?
A The steering is a little bit, I guess you could say higher speed. You’ll turn it a little more for the tires to allow for the weight.
Q In operating the forklift, what’s required of your left arm?
A All the steering and the controls for forward and reverse.

Q What do you physically have to do?

A The steering wheel sits fairly flat, so there’s a continuous full extension of your arm as you’re steering. The, most of the time I steer, I’ll steer with the palm of my hand where you’re, you know, it’s a constant full extension (demonstrating) of your arm. And then, when you forward and reverse, it’s just a small level underneath that, basically, you can hit with one or two fingers to hit forward and reverse.

Q Do you work at a steady or hard pace?

A Well, it’s a pretty fast pace because most of the trucks are time scheduled for leaving. And I’ve got to have them ready to go when the drivers are ready.
Q Is your, does the job constantly require the use of your, of your left arm?
A Operating the forklift is continuously nothing but my left arm and my right to do the controls.

Respondent vigorously argues that the operation of this particular forklift could not possibly cause carpal tunnel syndrome. This argument is based entirely on speculation. There is certainly insufficient credible evidence that the manner in which this forklift was operated could not cause carpal tunnel syndrome. Further, Dr. Ledbetter opined repeatedly that claimant’s carpal tunnel syndrome was causally related to his job duties as a forklift operator. Dr. Ledbetter held that opinion even when faced with minute details of the movements involved in operating a forklift, claimant’s activities on his rather small “hobby farm,” and various other speculative causes put forth by respondent. Respondent likewise wants to place great weight on Dr. Michael Moore’s opinion of “possible” causes or aggravations of claimant’s carpal tunnel syndrome. We accord greater weight to the opinion of Dr. Ledbetter because his opinion was stated within a reasonable degree of medical certainty.

Based on claimant’s credible testimony, the opinion of Dr. Ledbetter, claimant’s treating physician, and the lack of sufficient evidence of a nonwork-related explanation for claimant’s condition, we find that claimant has proven by a preponderance of the evidence that his left carpal tunnel syndrome is causally related to the employment.

We likewise find that claimant is entitled to benefits for a permanent anatomical impairment of 10% to the left upper extremity based on the opinion of Dr. Ledbetter. Dr. Ledbetter used the results of a nerve conduction velocity study indicating a mild impairment to the left upper extremity, applied the results to the Guides, and arrived at an appropriate rating. Dr. Ledbetter specifically rejected respondent’s argument that claimant was not entitled to an impairment rating because the electrodiagnostic studies on the left upper extremity might have been equal to or better than the right upper extremity. There is no medical opinion to the contrary. Further, respondent does not support its theory by any authority, other than its own speculation.

For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the opinion of the Administrative Law Judge finding that claimant has proven by a preponderance of the evidence that he sustained a compensable injury in the form of carpal tunnel syndrome. Additionally, we affirm the finding by the Administrative Law Judge that claimant is entitled to benefits for a permanent anatomical impairment of 10% to the left upper extremity. Respondent is directed to comply with the award set forth in the opinion of the Administrative Law Judge. All accrued benefits shall be paid in a lump sum without discount and with interest thereon at the lawful rate from the date of the Administrative Law Judge’s decision in accordance with Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-809 (Repl. 1996). For prevailing on this appeal before the Full Commission, claimant’s attorney is hereby awarded an additional attorney’s fee in the amount of $250.00 in accordance with Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-715 (Repl. 1996).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

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

Commissioner Wilson dissents.