Dura Craft Boats, Inc. v. Daugherty
| Decision Date | 23 October 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 5--6039,5--6039 |
| Citation | 485 S.W.2d 739,253 Ark. 340 |
| Parties | DURA CRAFT BOATS, INC., Appellant, v. George A. DAUGHERTY, Appellee. |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Riddick Riffel, Little Rock, for appellant.
Clifton Bond, Monticello, for appellee.
The appellee suffered an injury to his right hand when he was working as a riveter for the appellant. The Workmen's Compensation Commission, in affirming a referee's opinion, found that the appellee had sustained a 10% permanent partial disability to the right hand and awarded benefits for that degree of disability. The Circuit Court, on appellate review, reversed the action of the Commission and in doing so found that appellee was entitled to compensation for a permanent partial disability of 10% to the body as a whole rather than 10% to the right hand. A judgment was accordingly rendered.
We agree with the appellant that the extent of the claimant's injury or disability is primarily a question of fact for the Commission to determine. It is beyond the power of an appellate court to make a finding of fact as to the extent of a claimant's injuries. This is solely within the province of the Workmen's Compensation Commission as fact finders and the only power of an appellate court is to remand the case for further proceedings. Dura Craft Boats, Inc. v. Daugherty, 247 Ark. 125, 444 S.W.2d 562 (1969), Long-Bell Lumber Co. v. Mitchell, 206 Ark. 854, 177 S.W.2d 920 (1944). Therefore, the remaining issue before us as an appellate court is to determine if there is any substantial evidence to support the Commission's findings. This is the extent of our inquiry on appeal and if substantial evidence exists, we must affirm the Commission. St. Michael Hospital v. Wright, 250 Ark. 539, 465 S.W.2d 904 (1971).
Appellee's medical witness testified that he was of the opinion that appellee's disability was 5% to 10% to the body as a whole; however, on cross-examination, as abstracted, he testified: Appellant's medical witness, as abstracted, stated that ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Clark v. Peabody Testing Service
...Ark. 705, 409 S.W.2d 328. We must affirm if we find any substantial evidence to support the commission's ruling. Dura Craft Boats v. Daugherty, 253 Ark. 340, 485 S.W.2d 739; Turner v. Lambert Construction Co., supra; Potlatch Forests, Inc. v. Smith, supra. So, the extent of our inquiry is l......
-
Corbitt v. Mohawk Rubber Co.
...would support a contrary finding. St. Michael Hospital v. Wright, 250 Ark. 539, 465 S.W.2d 904 (1971); and Dura Craft Boats v. Daugherty, 253 Ark. 340, 485 S.W.2d 739 (1972). We do not reverse the commission's finding on a disputed factual issue unless the proof is so nearly undisputed that......
-
Northwestern Nat. Ins. Co. v. Weast
...Co., 249 Ark. 384, 459 S.W.2d 413 (1970); Bentley v. Henderson, 251 Ark. 203, 471 S.W.2d 548 (1971), and Dura Craft Boats v. Daugherty, 253 Ark. ---, 485 S.W.2d 739 (1972). Evidence was adduced that appellee claimant injured her back at work around 8 a.m. on December 8, 1969, when she slipp......
-
Bagwell v. Falcon Jet Corp.
...and the only power of an appellate court is to remand the case to the Commission for further proceedings. Dura Craft Boats v. Daugherty, 253 Ark. 340, 485 S.W.2d 739 (1972); Reddick v. Scott, 217 Ark. 38, 228 S.W.2d 1008 (1950); Long-Bell Lumber Co. v. Mitchell, 206 Ark. 854, 177 S.W.2d 920......