CLAIM NO. F003819
Before the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission
ORDER FILED MARCH 16, 2001
Upon review before the FULL COMMISSION in Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas.
Claimant represented by HONORABLE JON B. GANN, Attorney at Law, Hot Springs, Arkansas.
Respondents represented by HONORABLE THOMAS J. PENDOWSKI, Attorney at Law, Little Rock, Arkansas.
Decision of the Administrative Law Judge: Vacated and Remanded.
ORDER
The claimant appeals an opinion and order filed by the Administrative Law Judge on October 18, 2000. In that opinion and order, the Administrative Law Judge found that the claimant has failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that she sustained a compensable injury because the medical opinion on causation which was introduced into evidence is not stated within a reasonable degree of medical certainty. After conducting a de novo review of the entire record, we find that this case must be remanded to the Administrative Law Judge for more adequate findings.
The fact that the medical opinion offered into evidence in this case was not stated within a reasonable degree of medical certainty is not, in and of itself, sufficient to answer the question as to whether or not the claimant did or did not satisfy by a preponderance of the credible evidence in the record that she sustained a compensable injury. With regard to the issue of proving causation by medical evidence, we note that the Arkansas Supreme Court indicated in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v.VanWagner, 337 Ark. 443, 990 S.W.2d 472 (1999:
The plethora of possible causes for work-related injuries includes many that can be established by a common-sense observation and deduction. To require medical prove of causation in every case appears out of line with the general policy of economy and efficiency contained within the workers’ compensation law. To be sure, there will be circumstances where medical evidence will be necessary to establish that a particular injury resulted from a work-related incident — but not in every case.
As we understand the cited language from VanWagner, and assuming thatVanWagner is still good law, if the claimant does not establish causation through either objective medical evidence or expert medical opinion, the Administrative Law Judge is required to determine whether the claimant has proven causation by a preponderance of the non-medical evidence in the record. Consequently, we find that the Administrative Law Judge in this case erred as a matter of law in summarily rejecting the claimant’s claim, with no further analysis, once the Administrative Law Judge rejected the medical opinion in the record. Since the weight of the non-medical evidence will likely turn to at least some degree on credibility, and since the Administrative Law Judge has not made any specific findings based on the non-medical evidence, we remand this case to the Administrative Law Judge for more adequate findings.
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
______________________________ MIKE WILSON, Commissioner
______________________________ SHELBY W. TURNER, Commissioner