Holcombe v. Dan River Mills/Woodside Div., 0510

• Decision Date: 25 April 1985
• Docket Number: No. 0510,0510
• Citation: 333 S.E.2d 338,286 S.C. 223
• Parties: Violet HOLCOMBE, Respondent, v. DAN RIVER MILLS/WOODSIDE DIVISION, Appellant. . Heard
• Court: South Carolina Court of Appeals

Page 338

333 S.E.2d 338

286 S.C. 223

Violet HOLCOMBE, Respondent, v. DAN RIVER MILLS/WOODSIDE DIVISION, Appellant.

No. 0510.

Court of Appeals of South Carolina.

Heard April 25, 1985.

Decided June 25, 1985.

John P. Britton, of Rainey, Britton, Gibbes & Clarkson, P.A., Greenville, for appellant.

Don R. Moorhead, of Culbertson, Christian, Moorhead & Alexander, Greenville, for respondent.

GARDNER, Judge:

Violet Holcombe (Holcombe) was awarded total disability under the Workers' Compensation Act by the single Commissioner; his award was affirmed by the full Commission and Circuit Court. We affirm.

Holcombe has a tenth grade education. She has worked in textiles since she was about 19 years of age and was nearly 57 years of age at the time of the hearing. The testimony of Dr. Faris is that as of March 1979, Holcombe was permanently disabled as a result of her lung condition; however, Dr. Faris opined that the total disability because of her lung condition was etiologically related to several ailments, any one of which or the combination of all might have caused her total disability. Another witness, Dr. Landis, testified that Holcombe's disability was etiologically related to cotton dust exposure; however, this expert witness testified that in his opinion Holcombe had a 20-30 percent disability.

There is lay evidence of record that Holcombe can do only light work such as washing dishes, making her bed, and light housework. She cannot walk more than one-half block, has difficulty climbing steps due to shortness of breath, and experiences increased difficulties with breathing upon walking on inclines or hills.

The two issues before this court are whether (1) there is substantial evidence of record to support a finding that Holcombe is totally and permanently disabled by reason of her employment with Dan River and (2) the trial Commissioner abused his discretion in refusing after hearing to allow the taking of the deposition of Dr. Aldredge, who is not a medical doctor but is an expert in vocational rehabilitation.

I.

Our scope of review in workers' compensation cases is to determine whether there is substantial evidence of record to support the findings of the Commission. Lark v. Bi-Lo, Inc., 276 S.C. 130, 276 S.E.2d 304 (1981). Furthermore, § 1-23-380(g), Code of Laws of South Carolina (1976) provides that this court shall not substitute its judgment for that of the agency as to the weight of the evidence on questions of fact.

In this case the record reveals that several witnesses gave conflicting testimony. Where there is a conflict in the evidence, either of different witnesses or of the same witnesses, the findings of fact of the Commission as triers of the fact are conclusive. Sola v. Sunny Slope Farms, 244 S.C. 6, 135 S.E.2d 321 (1964). Dr. Faris testified that Holcombe was permanently disabled as the result of her lung condition; Dr. Landis testified that Holcombe's disability was etiologically related to cotton dust exposure. The Commission in workers' compensation cases sits as a jury does. It is elementary that a jury may believe part or all of a witness's testimony; this being true, there is evidence in this case both of permanent...