Elking v. Deaconess Hosp.
| Decision Date | 25 May 1999 |
| Docket Number | No. 75105,75105 |
| Parties | Sumae L. ELKING, Claimant-Respondent, v. DEACONESS HOSPITAL, Employer-Appellant, and Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, Insurer-Appellant. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Appeal from the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission, State of Missouri.
John F. Sander, Clare R. Behrle, St. Louis, for appellant.
Matthew J. Padberg, St. Louis, for respondent.
Before ROBERT G. DOWD, Jr., C.J., and KENT E. KAROHL, J., and CHARLES B. BLACKMAR, Senior Judge.
Deaconess Hospital (Employer) and Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (Insurer) appeal from the award of the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) granting medical expenses, permanent total disability benefits, and future medical expenses as a result of Sumae L. Elking's (Claimant) work related accident on May 29, 1988. Employer and Insurer contend the Commission erred (1) in that the award "is not responsive to issues raised in the Employee's claim for compensation and to that extent is void;" (2) in that "the Employee failed to prove that her May 29, 1988 accident, independent of all other factors, caused her to be permanently and totally disabled;" (3) in overruling their objection and admitting into evidence medical records and medical bills pertaining to the Employee's 1992 injury to her right femur; and (4) in that "the Employee failed to prove that her May 29, 1988 accident, independent of all other factors, supported an award of future medical."
We are bound to affirm the Commission's award if it is supported by competent and substantial evidence on the whole record. DeLong v. Shop 'N Save, 972 S.W.2d 495, 497 (Mo.App. E.D.1998). We defer to the Commission on issues concerning credibility and weight to be given to conflicting testimony. Cahall v. Cahall, 963 S.W.2d 368, 372 (Mo.App. E.D.1998). We find substantial evidence supported the Commission's findings that Employee has a permanent total disability causally related to the May 29, 1988, accident and compression fracture injury aggravated a preexisting compression fracture and spondylolisthesis, with causally resulting in surgical fusion, a right foot drop, right leg weakness and atrophy. Further, there was substantial and competent evidence to support the Commission's finding that Employee's fall...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Marston v. Juvenile Justice Center
...for leave. Generally, however, the rules of civil procedure do not apply to workers' compensation actions. Elking v. Deaconess Hospital, 996 S.W.2d 718, 718 (Mo.App. 1999). This is true unless a statute implicates the application of a specific rule. See, e.g., State ex rel. McConaha v. Alle......
-
Hale v. Treasurer of Missouri
...the Workers' Compensation Act, substantial rights are to be enforced at the sacrifice of procedural rights. Elking v. Deaconess Hosp., 996 S.W.2d 718, 719 (Mo.App. E.D.1999). Where no objection is made, hearsay testimony may be considered and, further, all probative evidence received withou......