This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.
Facts
A worker alleged that she injured her right arm and shoulder on December 9, 2006, while working as a cashier at Wal-Mart. She claimed to have tripped over boxes, attempted to catch herself, and fell against a wall partition, though she did not fall to the floor. Surveillance video of the incident did not show her tripping or falling but depicted her kicking a box and later favoring her right arm. Medical professionals diagnosed her with a shoulder strain and related injuries.
Procedural History
- Workers’ Compensation Administration: The Workers’ Compensation Judge (WCJ) found that the worker sustained a compensable injury and was entitled to benefits.
Parties' Submissions
- Appellants (Employer/Insurer): Argued that the WCJ’s decision was not supported by substantial evidence, particularly in light of the surveillance video and testimony from a physician’s assistant, which they claimed contradicted the worker’s account. They also contended that the WCJ improperly relied on the opinion of another medical professional who had not reviewed the video.
- Appellee (Worker): Asserted that she sustained a compensable injury while performing her job duties and that the medical evidence supported her claim. She maintained that the surveillance video did not contradict her account of the incident.
Legal Issues
- Was there substantial evidence to support the WCJ’s finding that the worker sustained a compensable injury?
- Did the WCJ err in relying on the testimony of a medical professional who had not reviewed the surveillance video?
- Did the WCJ err in rejecting the testimony of another medical professional who expressed uncertainty about the causal connection between the injury and the worker’s employment?
Disposition
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the WCJ’s decision, finding that the worker sustained a compensable injury and was entitled to benefits.
Reasons
Per Wechsler J. (Fry C.J. and Castillo J. concurring):
The Court conducted a whole record review to determine whether substantial evidence supported the WCJ’s findings. It emphasized that appellate courts do not reweigh evidence but assess whether the findings were reasonable based on the entire record.
The Court noted that multiple witnesses, including medical professionals and the store manager, observed or examined the worker and concluded that she had suffered an injury consistent with her account. The surveillance video, while not showing the exact incident described by the worker, depicted her kicking a box and later favoring her arm, which the WCJ reasonably interpreted as evidence of an injury.
The Court rejected the appellants’ argument that the WCJ erred in relying on the testimony of a medical professional who had not reviewed the video. It found that the WCJ was entitled to weigh the credibility of the medical opinions and accept the testimony that supported the worker’s claim. The Court also determined that the testimony of the other medical professional, who expressed uncertainty about causation, was not uncontradicted and did not preclude the WCJ from finding in favor of the worker.
The Court concluded that the WCJ’s findings and conclusions were reasonable in light of the whole record and affirmed the decision.