Fund v. Am. Home Assurance Co., Appellate Case No. 2012-213511

• Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina
• Writing for the Court: PER CURIAM
• Decision Date: 18 June 2014
• Parties: South Carolina Second Injury Fund, Appellant, v. American Home Assurance Co., Respondent. (In Re: John Stroud v. John F. Stroud & Sons, Inc.)
• Docket Number: Appellate Case No. 2012-213511,Unpublished Opinion No. 2014-UP-227

South Carolina Second Injury Fund, Appellant,
v.
American Home Assurance Co., Respondent.
(In Re: John Stroud v. John F. Stroud & Sons, Inc.)

Appellate Case No. 2012-213511
Unpublished Opinion No. 2014-UP-227

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals

Heard March 6, 2014
Filed June 18, 2014

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.
Appeal From Chesterfield County Paul M. Burch, Circuit Court Judge
AFFIRMED

Latonya Dilligard Edwards, of Dilligard Edwards, LLC, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Jared Matthew Pretulak and Robert Charles Rogers, both of Gallivan, White & Boyd, PA, of Greenville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: In this workers' compensation matter, South Carolina Second Injury Fund (the Fund) appeals the decision of the circuit court affirming the order

Page 2

of South Carolina Workers' Compensation Commission (the Commission) granting American Home Assurance Co. (Carrier) reimbursement pursuant to section 42-9-400 of the South Carolina Code. The Fund argues (1) claimant's diabetes was not serious enough to constitute a hindrance or obstacle to employment or reemployment, nor did it result in a combination with or aggravation by claimant's subsequent work-related injury; (2) the Commission erred in finding Carrier is entitled to reimbursement for claimant's permanent and total disability because claimant's preexisting conditions did not contribute to claimant's disability; (3) the Commission erred in finding the Fund conceded knowledge of claimant's alleged traumatic brain injury/brain damage and that claimant's prior concussion rose to the level of brain damage; and (4) if claimant's concussion constituted a permanent condition, it was not serious enough to constitute a hindrance or obstacle to employment, nor did it result in a combination with or aggravation by claimant's subsequent work-related injury. Based on the substantial evidence of record, we affirm pursuant to Rule...