Short v. Wilson Meat House, LLC
| Docket Number: | 2008-CT-01224-SCT Linked Case(s): 2008-WC-01224-SCT ; 2008-WC-01224-COA ; 2008-WC-01224-COA ; 2008-CT-01224-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 06-17-2010 Opinion Author: Dickinson, J. Holding: Court of Appeals reversed; Commission reinstated and affirmed. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Workers' compensation - Substantial evidence - Causation - Supplementation of record - Mississippi Workers’ Compensation Commission Procedural Rule 9 Judge(s) Concurring: Waller, C.J., Carlson, P.J., Randolph, Lamar, Chandler and Pierce, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Kitchens, J. Dissenting Author : Graves, P.J., Dissents With Separate Written Opinion. Procedural History: Admin or Agency Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - WORKERS’ COMPENSATION Writ of Certiorari: yes Appealed from Court of Appeals |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 06-30-2008 Appealed from: Copiah County Circuit Court Judge: Lamar Pickard Disposition: The Mississippi Workers’ Compensation Commission denied an employee’s claim. The Circuit Court of Copiah County, sitting as an appellate tribunal, affirmed. The Court of Appeals reversed. Case Number: 2007-0364 |
|
| Note: | This opinion reverses a previous judgment by the Court of Appeals. See the original COA opinion at: http://www.mssc.state.ms.us/Images/Opinions/CO55267.pdf | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Wade Short |
JOHN HUNTER STEVENS |
|
|
| Appellee: | Wilson Meat House, LLC and Bridgefield Casualty Insurance Company | PETER L. CORSON | ||
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 - Substantial evidence - Causation - Supplementation of record - Mississippi Workers’ Compensation Commission Procedural Rule 9 |
| Summary of the Facts: | Wade Short worked at Wilson’s Meat House. In addition to his regular duties in the meat-processing area, Short regularly filled in for vacationing coworkers on the “kill floor,” where the slaughtering was done and where the wages were higher. After allegedly being injured while helping to carry a desk at work, Short filed a Petition to Controvert with the Mississippi Workers’ Compensation Commission, alleging that Wilson’s had failed “to notify insurance [carrier] of claim and pay benefits required by Act.” He also filed a motion requesting “emergency relief,” stating that he was in straits following surgery, unable to buy food and other necessities. The administrative law judge denied Short’s claim, because he had not offered proof that his injury was work-related. Notably, Short failed to introduce evidence from a physician on the causation issue. Attempting to correct that deficiency, Short filed a Motion to Supplement the Record before the Commission. Without explanation, the Commission denied the motion and affirmed the ALJ’s ruling. Short appealed to circuit court which affirmed. The Court of Appeals reversed, finding substantial evidence in the record to support Short’s claim. The Supreme Court granted certiorari. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Substantial evidence Short argues that the Commission’s finding - that he failed to establish that he was injured on the job while helping carry the desk - was not supported by substantial evidence. There is very little evidence in the record supporting Short’s claim. He testified that, as he helped move the desk, he heard a popping sound in his neck. Short was the only witness who testified that his injury had occurred on the job. Short made inconsistent statements about when he first had back pain. His supervisor, based on an acquaintance of thirty-two years, cast doubt on Short’s truthfulness. Ultimately, the ALJ found that, against the backdrop of the evidence, the absence of evidence from a physician regarding a causal connection between Short’s job and his injury was dispositive. The Commission did not err in this finding. In all but the simple and routine cases, it is necessary to establish medical causation by expert testimony. Issue 2: Supplementation of record Short filed a Motion to Supplement the Record, seeking to put before the Commission a letter from his surgeon which he said would establish a causal connection between his injury and the incident at work. He argues that the Commission had the power to grant his motion. The Commission has the authority to receive live testimony and other evidence to supplement the record made before the administrative law judge. Mississippi Workers’ Compensation Commission Procedural Rule 9 sets certain requirements for such a motion, however. It requires that a motion for the introduction of additional evidence must be made in writing at least five days prior to the date of the hearing of the review by the Full Commission and must state with particularity the nature of such evidence, the necessity therefor, and the reason it was not introduced at the evidentiary hearing. Nothing in the substance of Short’s motion suggests the reason he did not introduce the evidence at, or prior to, the hearing. Thus, the Commission did not abuse its discretion by requiring conformity with its rules and by denying Short’s motion. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
