Julie Moore vs. Greenbrier Nursing & Rehab Center

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. H303140 JULIE MOORE, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT GREENBRIER NURSING & REHAB CENTER, EMPLOYER RESPONDENT INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA/ESIS, INC., CARRIER/TPA RESPONDENT OPINION FILED APRIL 30, 2025 Upon review before the FULL COMMISSION in Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas. Claimant represented by the HONORABLE LAURA BETH YORK, Attorney at Law, Little Rock, Arkansas. Respondents represented by the HONORABLE ERIC NEWKIRK, Attorney at Law, Little Rock, Arkansas. Decision of Administrative Law Judge: Affirmed and Adopted. OPINION AND ORDER Claimant appeals an opinion and order of the Administrative Law Judge filed December 3, 2024. In said order, the Administrative Law Judge made the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: 1. The AWCC has jurisdiction over this claim. 2. The previously-noted stipulations are accepted as fact. 3. The claimant failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that she suffered compensable injuries to her back/spin or hip by specific incident.

Moore-H303140 2 4. The claimant, thus, failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that she is entitled to the benefits sought. 5. The issue of determining the claimant’s average weekly wage is moot. 6. The claimant failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that she is entitled to an attorney’s fee. We have carefully conducted a de novo review of the entire record herein and it is our opinion that the Administrative Law Judge's decision is supported by a preponderance of the credible evidence, correctly applies the law, and should be affirmed. Specifically, we find from a preponderance of the evidence the findings of fact made by the Administrative Law Judge are correct and they are, therefore, adopted by the Full Commission. Therefore, we affirm and adopt the December 3, 2024 decision of the Administrative Law Judge, including all findings and conclusions therein, as the decision of the Full Commission on appeal. IT IS SO ORDERED. ___________________________________ SCOTTY DALE DOUTHIT, Chairman ___________________________________ MICHAEL R. MAYTON, Commissioner Commissioner Willhite concurs.

Moore-H303140 3 CONCURRING OPINION After my de novo review of the record, I concur with the majority opinion finding that the Claimant failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that she suffered compensable injuries to her back/spine or hip by specific incident. I write separately for the benefit of the Claimant. Claimant was employed with the Respondent for her first shift on April 29, 2023. During her shift, the Claimant was seen moving a bed for a patient. While Claimant stated that she was in pain as a result of her employment with the Respondent, specifically stating that she bumped into the nurse’s station with a broken bed, there is insufficient evidence of an objective injury as required by Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-102(4)(D). A compensable injury must be established by medical evidence supported by objective findings and medical opinions addressing compensability must be stated within a degree of medical certainty. Smith-Blair, Inc. v. Jones, 77 Ark. App. 273, 72 S.W.3d 560 (2002). Further, although diagnostic testing showed some abnormalities in the Claimant’s lower back, there is insufficient evidence to conclude those abnormalities resulted from any incident at the workplace. While the Claimant is a credible witness, I cannot say that the evidence in the record is sufficient to meet the required burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence that she suffered compensable injuries to her back/spine or hip by specific incident.

Moore-H303140 4 Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above, I must dissent. _____________________________ M. SCOTT WILLHITE, Commissioner