Ryburn Motor Co. v. Atkins , 2014 Ark. App. 114 ( 2014 )

Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 114
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION II
CV-13-732
No.
Opinion Delivered February 12, 2014
RYBURN MOTOR COMPANY and
RISK MANAGEMENT RESOURCES APPEAL FROM THE ARKANSAS
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION
APPELLANTS COMMISSION
[NO. F801886]
V.
RICHARD DOUGLAS ATKINS
APPELLEE AFFIRMED
RHONDA K. WOOD, Judge
Appellants Ryburn Motor Company and Risk Management Resources appeal from
a Workers’ Compensation Commission decision that found appellee Richard Atkins had
met his burden of proof in establishing the compensability of a right-hip injury. Appellants
argue that Atkins did not prove that his right-hip condition was a compensable
consequence of his other injuries following a work-related accident. However, the
Commission’s decision was supported by substantial evidence, and we affirm.
While working at a car dealership, a truck fell from a rack, struck Atkins, and
pinned him against a concrete wall. Appellants admitted that Atkins sustained compensable
injuries to his left hip, left knee, and left arm. Subsequently, Atkins began experiencing
problems with his right hip, and his doctor recommended a right-hip replacement to
alleviate the situation. Appellants denied liability for the condition of Atkins’s right hip,
Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 114
and the administrative law judge (ALJ) conducted a hearing to determine the
compensability of the claim. The Workers’ Compensation Commission affirmed the ALJ’s
finding that the right-hip injury was compensable.
Our standard of review for workers’ compensation claims is clear. We view the
evidence in the light most favorable to the Commission’s decision and affirm the decision
if it is supported by substantial evidence. Hudak-Lee v. Baxter Cnty. Reg’l Hosp., 2011 Ark.
31, 378 S.W.3d 77. Substantial evidence is evidence that a reasonable mind might accept
as adequate to support a conclusion. Id. On review, the issue is not whether the appellate
court might have reached a different result from the Commission, but whether reasonable
minds could reach the result found by the Commission. Id. Additionally, questions
concerning the credibility of witnesses and the weight to be given to their testimony are
within the exclusive province of the Commission. Cedar Chem. Co. v. Knight, 372 Ark.
233, 273 S.W.3d 473 (2008).
The Commission found that Atkins’s right-hip injury was a compensable
consequence of his left-knee injury resulting from his work accident. When the primary
injury is shown to have arisen out of and in the course of employment, every natural
consequence that flows from the injury likewise arises out of the employment, unless it is
the result of an independent intervening cause. Homes v. Beard, 82 Ark. App. 607, 120
S.W.3d 160 (2003). Here, there was evidence that Atkins’s left knee was seriously hurt in
the accident, and after treatment, he began using a cane or a walker. This caused Atkins to
shift his weight when walking and caused right-hip pain. Atkins testified that his right-hip
condition grew progressively worse over time, and his testimony was supported by
2
Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 114
notations of an altered gait caused by his left-knee injury in his medical records. Atkins
also testified that he had no physical restrictions or work absences for his knee or hip prior
to his accident at work. We hold that substantial evidence supports the decision that
Atkins suffered a compensable consequence injury to his right hip.
Affirmed.
GLADWIN, C.J., and BROWN, J., agree.
Worley, Wood & Parrish, P.A., by: Melissa Wood, for appellants.
Gary Davis, for appellee.
3