Pub. Employees' Retirement Sys. V. Worlow
| Docket Number: | 2010-CC-00918-COA Linked Case(s): 2010-CC-00918-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 06-21-2011 Opinion Author: Irving, P.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Disability benefits - Substantial evidence Judge(s) Concurring: Lee, C.J., Griffis, P.J., Myers, Barnes, Ishee, Roberts, Carlton, Maxwell and Russell, JJ. Nature of the Case: CIVIL - STATE BOARDS AND AGENCIES |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 12-10-2009 Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court Judge: Winston Kidd Disposition: REVERSED PERS’S DENIAL OF STATE DISABILITY BENEFITS AND ORDERED THAT BENEFITS BE GRANTED Case Number: 251-06-731-CIV |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | The Public Employees' Retirement System |
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: JANE L. MAPP, KATHERINE LESTER TRUNDT |
|
|
| Appellee: | Rebecca Worlow | MICHELLE DEAN EASTERLING | ||
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: | Disability benefits - Substantial evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Rebecca Worlow worked as a teacher in the Aberdeen School District for twenty-six years. In 2005, Worlow terminated her employment and later filed an application for non-duty related disability with the Public Employees’ Retirement System. The PERS Medical Board denied Worlow’s request for benefits, finding that there was insufficient objective medical evidence in support of her disability claim. Worlow appealed to the Disability Appeals Committee, which recommended to the PERS Board of Trustees that benefits be denied. The Board adopted the Committee’s recommendation. Worlow then appealed to circuit court which reversed the Board’s decision. PERS appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | PERS argues that the circuit court erred in reversing its denial of benefits because its decision was supported by substantial evidence and was not arbitrary or capricious. The applicant for disability benefits carries the initial burden of proving to PERS, through objective medical evidence, that she is disabled. However, the primary question before an appellate court is not whether there is ‘substantial evidence’ of a disability, but whether the record contains substantial evidence to support PERS’s finding that the applicant is not disabled. Here, the record does not contain substantial evidence that Worlow is not disabled. Dr. Hayes unequivocally stated that Worlow’s rheumatoid arthritis prevented her from performing her job duties. Specifically, he stated that Worlow could not stand for more than one hour uninterrupted and could not sit for more than two hours interrupted. Dr. Brown and Dr. Asa stated that Worlow’s condition limited her ability to stand and write continuously. Additionally, Worlow’s principal certified that she could not perform her job duties, which frequently required standing and writing. Finally, Dr. Gray, who evaluated Worlow at PERS’s request, gave no opinion regarding whether Worlow’s condition rendered her unable to perform the duties associated with teaching. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
