Minor v. Philips Products, 24731
| Decision Date | 04 March 1997 |
| Docket Number | No. 24731,24731 |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | Jacqueline MINOR, Respondent, v. PHILIPS PRODUCTS and Gallagher Basset Services, Inc., Appellants. . Heard |
Stanford E. Lacy, of Collins & Lacy, P.C., Columbia, for appellants.
F.G. Delleney, Jr., of Hamilton, Hamilton, Delleney & Gibbons, Chester, for respondent.
Appellants Philips Products and Gallagher Basset appeal the circuit court judge's order upholding a determination by the South Carolina Workers' Compensation Commission that respondent Jacqueline Minor's injury was caused by a job related accident. We affirm.
Minor sought workers' compensation benefits based upon an accidental injury to her arm while employed by Philips Products. A hearing was held before the single commissioner to determine compensability and benefits payable if indicated. The commissioner found Minor was entitled to temporary total compensation from the time she was out of work because of her injury. Additionally, the commissioner held that Minor suffered a 12% permanent partial impairment disability to her left upper extremity as a result of an accidental injury on June 2, 1994. Appellants were ordered to pay benefits. The single commissioner's order was affirmed by a workers' compensation commission panel and the circuit court.
Appellants contend it was error to find Minor was injured by accident. Instead they claim Minor has described a repetitive motion injury which should be treated as an occupational disease.
A decision of the Workers' Compensation Commission must be affirmed if the factual findings are supported by substantial evidence in the record. Stokes v. First National Bank, 306 S.C. 46, 410 S.E.2d 248 (1991). Substantial evidence is not a mere scintilla of evidence, but evidence which, considering the record as a whole, would allow reasonable minds to reach the conclusion the agency reached. Id.
The commissioner found that Minor injured her arm through an aggravation that, coupled with a previous incident, brought the injury to the status of an accident on June 2, 1994. The commissioner concluded Minor suffered a compensable injury by accident arising out of and in the course and scope of her employment. The commissioner relied on the deposition testimony of Doctors Stone and Lehman concerning causation. Dr. Lehman testified that Minor did not describe a specific event that brought on the pain but rather, the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jennings v. Chambers Development Co.
...decision must be affirmed if the factual findings are supported by substantial evidence in the record. Minor v. Philips Prods., 329 S.C. 321, 494 S.E.2d 819 (1997). Substantial evidence is that evidence which, in considering the record as a whole, would allow reasonable minds to reach the c......
-
Pee v. AVM, INC.
...is a question of fact for the Commission. Sharpe v. Case Produce Inc., 336 S.C. 154, 519 S.E.2d 102 (1999). 5. In Minor v. Philips Prods., 329 S.C. 321, 494 S.E.2d 819 (1997), the appellant/employer raised the issue whether a repetitive motion injury should be considered an occupational dis......
-
Sharpe v. Case Produce, Inc., 24982.
...decision must be affirmed if the factual findings are supported by substantial evidence in the record. Minor v. Philips Prods., 329 S.C. 321, 494 S.E.2d 819 (1997). Substantial evidence is that evidence which, in considering the record as a whole, would allow reasonable minds to reach the c......