Odom v. FedEx Ground Package Sys., Inc.


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2009-WC-00444-COA

Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 11-10-2009
Opinion Author: ISHEE, J.
Holding: AFFIRMED

Additional Case Information: Topic: Workers' compensation - Work-related injury
Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., IRVING, GRIFFIS, BARNES, ROBERTS AND CARLTON, JJ.
Non Participating Judge(s): MAXWELL, J.
Procedural History: Admin or Agency Judgment
Nature of the Case: CIVIL - WORKERS’ COMPENSATION

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 03-06-2009
Appealed from: Forrest County Circuit Court
Judge: Robert Helfrich
Disposition: CIRCUIT COURT AFFIRMED THE COMMISSION’S DENIAL OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION BENEFITS
Case Number: CI07-0048

  Party Name: Attorney Name:   Brief(s) Available:
Appellant: JOSHUA LOWELL ODOM




LEONARD BROWN MELVIN III



 
  • Appellant #1 Brief
  • Appellant #1 Reply Brief

  • Appellee: FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM, INC. WILLIAM BIENVILLE SKIPPER  

    Synopsis provided by:

    If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals
    hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office.

    Topic: Workers' compensation - Work-related injury

    Summary of the Facts: Joshua Odom filed a petition to controvert while working part-time at FedEx Ground. The administrative law judge determined that Odom had not met his burden of proving that he had sustained a compensable work-related injury. Therefore, the judge denied Odom’s claim for workers’ compensation benefits. Odom appealed that ruling to the Commission, which affirmed the administrative law judge’s ruling. Odom then appealed to the circuit court, which affirmed the Commission’s decision. Odom appeals.

    Summary of Opinion Analysis: Odom argues that the Commission erred in finding that he did not prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he suffered a compensable work-related injury. The Commission pointed out numerous contradictions and inconsistencies in Odom’s account. Not only was Odom’s account contradictory regarding the date of the alleged injury, but also his medical records were contradictory regarding whether the injury even occurred at work. When a patient gives a history to a physician which is inconsistent with allegations in a workers’ compensation case, this is a significant factor in support of denial of a claim. Odom’s various medical records reflect different accounts as to whether the injury occurred at home or at work and also as to when the injury occurred. Ultimately, the Commission is the judge of the credibility of the witnesses. The Commission’s decision to deny benefits to Odom was not the product of an error of law and was not arbitrary and capricious.


    Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court