{"id":"full_commission-H202874-2024-09-05","awcc_number":"H202874","decision_date":"2024-09-05","opinion_type":"full_commission","claimant_name":"Todd Griffin","employer_name":"Milbank Manufacturing Company","title":"GRIFFIN VS. MILBANK MANUFACTURING COMPANY AWCC# H202874 September 5, 2024","outcome":"granted","outcome_keywords":["granted:1"],"injury_keywords":["hip"],"pdf_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/Griffin_Todd_H202874_20240905.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/full-commission-opinions/","filename":"Griffin_Todd_H202874_20240905.pdf","text_length":8800,"full_text":"NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION \n \nBEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION \n \nCLAIM NO. H202874 \n \nTODD O. GRIFFIN, EMPLOYEE    CLAIMANT \n \nMILBANK MANUFACTURING COMPANY,  \nEMPLOYER                                                                           RESPONDENT \n \nSTANDARD FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY/ \nTRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, \nINSURANCE CARRIER/TPA                                                 RESPONDENT \n \nOPINION FILED SEPTEMBER 5, 2024 \n \nUpon review before the FULL COMMISSION in Little Rock, Pulaski County, \nArkansas. \n \nClaimant represented by the HONORABLE LAURA BETH YORK, Attorney \nat Law, Little Rock, Arkansas. \n \nRespondents represented by the HONORABLE GUY ALTON WADE, \nAttorney at Law, Little Rock, Arkansas. \n \nDecision of Administrative Law Judge:  Affirmed and Adopted. \n \nOPINION AND ORDER \n Claimant appeals an opinion and order of the Administrative Law \nJudge filed May 15, 2024. In said order, the Administrative Law Judge \nmade the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: \n The stipulations contained in the prehearing order filed November \n21, 2023, hereby are accepted as facts. \n1. The claimant has failed to meet his burden of proof in \ndemonstrating that he is PTD. \n  \n\nGriffin-H202874  2 \n \n \n2. The claimant has met his burden of proof in \ndemonstrating he is entitled to an additional five \npercent (5%) in PPD based on wage loss disability.  \n \n3. The claimant’s attorney is entitled to a controverted fee \nbased on the aforementioned 5% wage loss disability \nfinding. \n \n We have carefully conducted a de novo review of the entire record \nherein and it is our opinion that the Administrative Law Judge's decision is \nsupported by a preponderance of the credible evidence, correctly applies \nthe law, and should be affirmed.  The findings of fact and conclusions of law \nmade by the Administrative Law Judge are correct and they are, therefore, \nadopted by the Full Commission.  \n Therefore, we affirm and adopt the May 15, 2024 decision of the \nAdministrative Law Judge, including all findings and conclusions therein, as \nthe decision of the Full Commission on appeal.  \n IT IS SO ORDERED. \n    ___________________________________ \n    SCOTTY DALE DOUTHIT, Chairman \n \n     \n    ___________________________________ \n    MICHAEL R. MAYTON, Commissioner \n \n \nCommissioner Willhite dissents. \n  \n\nGriffin-H202874  3 \n \n \nDISSENTING OPINION \n   The Claimant appeals an Administrative Law Judge (hereinafter \nreferred to as “ALJ”) Opinion that the Claimant has failed to meet his \nburden of proof in demonstrating that he is permanently and totally \ndisabled.  Further Claimant appeals the ALJ finding that he is entitled to an \nadditional five percent (5%) in permanent partial disability based on his \nclaim for wage-loss benefits.  After conducting a thorough review of the \nrecord, I would concur in part and dissent in part.  \n1. The Claimant has failed to meet his burden of proof in \ndemonstrating that he is permanently and totally disabled.  \n Pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-519(e)(1), permanent total \ndisability means the “inability, because of compensable injury or \noccupational disease, to earn any meaningful wages in the same or other \nemployment.”  The burden of proof is on the employee to prove inability to \nearn any meaningful wages in the same or other employment.  Ark. Code \nAnn. §11-90519(e)(2). \n Permanent total disability shall be determined in accordance with the \nfacts.  Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-519(c).  \n The Claimant suffered an admittedly compensable injury to his left \nhip on April 4, 2022, after falling off of a ladder working for Respondent.  \nClaimant underwent a left hip arthroplasty on May 2, 2022, as performed by \n\nGriffin-H202874  4 \n \n \nhis authorized physician, Dr. James Rudder.  On January 3, 2023, Dr. \nRudder places Claimant at maximum medical improvement stating “the \npatient has now reached maximum medical improvement.  He will have a \npermanent impairment that will be dictated under separate letter.”  Dr. \nRudder filled out an AR-3 for the Claimant and his compensable injury on \nFebruary 28, 2023.  Dr. Rudder stated that the Claimant cannot return to \nwork in his prior position as he will be unable to perform his prior duties and \nstated that the Claimant has suffered a permanent impairment rating of \n20% to the body as a whole.  Dr. Rudder does not take Claimant off of work \ncompletely.  In September of 2023, Dr. Rudder changed the Claimant’s \npermanent impairment rating to 15% to the body as a whole, but again does \nnot take Claimant off of work completely.  \nWhile the Claimant is unable to perform in his prior position, as \nopined by Dr. Rudder, there is not enough evidence in the record to \nconclusively state that the Claimant cannot earn any meaningful wages in \nthe same or other employment.  Claimant has received an FCE that placed \nhim in the medium category of work with reliable results, and his authorized \nphysician has not taken him off work completely.  Therefore, I must concur \nwith the ALJ’s findings that the Claimant failed to meet his burden of proof \nin demonstrating that he is permanently and totally disabled.  \n\nGriffin-H202874  5 \n \n \n2. The Claimant has met his burden of proof in demonstrating that \nhe is entitled to an additional 50% wage-loss disability benefit.  \n Wage-loss factor is the extent to which a compensable injury has \naffected the Claimant’s ability to earn a livelihood.  Whitlatch v. Southland \nLand & Dev., 84 Ark. App. 399, 141 S.W. 3d 916 (2004).  The Commission \nis charged with the duty of determining disability.  Cross v. Crawford County \nMemorial Hosp., 54 Ark.  App. 130, 923 S.W.2d 886 (1996).  In considering \nclaims for permanent partial disability benefits in excess of the employee’s \npercentage of permanent physical impairment, the Workers’ Compensation \nCommission may take into account, in addition to the percentage of \npermanent physical impairment, such factors as the employee’s age, \neducation, work experience, and other matters reasonably expected to \naffect his or her future earning capacity.  Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-522(b)(1).  \nSuch other matters are motivation, post injury income, credibility, \ndemeanor, and a multitude of other factors.  Glass v. Edens, 233 Ark. 786, \n346 S.W.2d 685 (1961); City of Fayetteville v. Guess, 10 Ark.  App. 313, \n663 S.W.2d 946 (1984); Curry v. Franklin Electric, 32 Ark.  App. 168, 798 \nS.W.2d 130 (1990); Cross v. Crawford County Memorial Hosp., supra.  It is \nwell established that a claimant’s prior work history and education are \nfactors to be considered in determining eligibility for wage-loss benefits.  \nSee Cross v. Crawford County Memorial Hosp., supra.; Glass v. Edens, \n\nGriffin-H202874  6 \n \n \nsupra.; City of Fayetteville v. Guess, supra.; Curry v. Franklin Electric, \nsupra. \n Claimant is 59 years old.  Claimant graduated from high school and \nhas approximately one semester of college. Claimant obtained “votech” \ntraining for air-conditioning and refrigeration in the 1980s. Claimant’s prior \nwork-history includes working for refineries such as Lion Oil as a cleaner, \nWorsham Wholesale as a delivery person, and finally as a general laborer \nfor an aluminum boat company. Claimant worked for Respondent for \napproximately 30-years and does not have experience in skill-based jobs. \nLastly, Claimant testified that he had very little experience with computers \nor skilled labor.  \nClaimant underwent an FCE on February 14, 2023, where he was \ngiven a medium classification with reliable results based on an 8-hour \nworkday. Ultimately, the Respondents were unable to return the Claimant to \nthe position he had prior to his compensable injury, or any other position \nwithin their company.  \n Claimant’s compensable injuries have affected his ability to earn a \nlivelihood. Claimant has limited education. Claimant is unable to perform \nlabor intensive work as he has in the past. Claimant is also unable to earn \nwages equal to or greater than his average weekly wage at the time of the \n\nGriffin-H202874  7 \n \n \naccident. This Commission has ruled that significant wage-loss benefits are \nappropriate for fact patterns such as the case at hand. See Ark. Dot v. \nAbercrombie, 2019 Ark. App. 372, 584 S.W.3d 701 (2019); Ark. Highway & \nTransp. Dep’t v. Wiggins, 2016 Ark. App. 364, 499 S.W.3d 229. Therefore, I \nwould rule that the Claimant is entitled to 50% wage-loss disability over and \nabove his permanent impairment rating.  \nFor the reasons stated above, I respectfully concur in part and \ndissent in part. \n                                                                                              \n_______________________________ \n                                                         M. SCOTT WILLHITE, Commissioner","preview":"NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. H202874 TODD O. GRIFFIN, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT MILBANK MANUFACTURING COMPANY, EMPLOYER RESPONDENT STANDARD FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY/ TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, INSURANCE CARRIER/TPA RESPONDENT OPINION FILED SEPTEMBER 5, 2024 Upon ...","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T22:29:44.916Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/full_commission-H202874-2024-09-05","pdf":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/Griffin_Todd_H202874_20240905.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/full-commission-opinions/"}}