Scruggs v. Tuscarora Yarns, Inc., 1043

• Decision Date: 22 September 1987
• Docket Number: No. 1043,1043
• Citation: 294 S.C. 47,362 S.E.2d 319
• Court: South Carolina Court of Appeals
• Parties: , 72 A.L.R.4th 899 Vera SCRUGGS, Respondent, v. TUSCARORA YARNS, INC., Employer, and Carolinas Textile Manufacturers, Carrier, Appellants. . Heard

Page 319

362 S.E.2d 319

294 S.C. 47, 72 A.L.R.4th 899

Vera SCRUGGS, Respondent, v. TUSCARORA YARNS, INC., Employer, and Carolinas Textile

Manufacturers, Carrier, Appellants.

No. 1043.

Court of Appeals of South Carolina.

Heard Sept. 22, 1987.

Decided Nov. 9, 1987.

Michael A. Farry, of Horton, Drawdy, Ward & Johnson, Greenville, for appellants.

Richard H. Rhodes and Ben C. Harrison, of Burts, Turner, Hammett, Harrison, Rhodes & Thompson, Spartanburg, for respondent.

SHAW, Judge:

This is an appeal from an award of the South Carolina Industrial Commission under the South Carolina Workers' Compensation Law. Appellants, Tuscarora Yarns, Inc. and Carolinas Textile Manufacturers, hereinafter employer, appeal from an award of the single commissioner in favor of respondent, Vera Scruggs. The full commission and the circuit court upheld the award. We affirm.

On September 21, 1983, Mrs. Scruggs suffered injuries to her back while working for Tuscarora Yarns, Inc. She missed over three weeks of work, returning on October 17, 1983, and continuing to work until May 2, 1984. Subsequent to leaving work, Mrs. Scruggs sought treatment from Dr. Seastrunk, a doctor specializing in orthopaedics. Dr. Seastrunk transferred Mrs. Scruggs to the care of Dr. Rollins for diagnosis and treatment of a suspected ruptured disc. Upon examination, Dr. Rollins was "highly suspicious that she [had] a herniated lumbar disc." The only way to verify this diagnosis with certainty was to have a myelogram, a test which Dr. Rollins told her was not to be taken lightly and should be performed only if she wanted to proceed with surgery. Dr. Rollins testified there was a 70 to 75 percent chance surgery would lead to a significant improvement in Mrs. Scruggs' condition, but that he did not recommend surgery since he felt patients need to make that decision for themselves. The single commissioner found Mrs. Scruggs suffered a total and permanent disability of 50 percent and should receive compensation of $160.35 per week for a period not to exceed 500 weeks.

The employer first argues there is no substantial evidence to support a finding that Mrs. Scruggs was permanently and totally disabled as a result of the September 1983 injury. Substantial evidence is such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion and we will not overturn a finding of fact by an administrative agency unless there is no reasonable probability the facts could be related by a witness upon whose testimony the finding was based. Lark v. Bi-Lo, Inc., 276 S.C. 130, 276 S.E.2d 304 (1981).

The employer admits Mrs. Scruggs suffered a compensable accident on September 21, 1983, but contends there was no causal connection between that injury and her disability. In Cross v. Concrete Materials, 236 S.C. 440, 114 S.E.2d 828 (1960), our Supreme Court held when the testimony of medical experts is relied upon to establish a causal connection between an accident and a subsequent disability, the expert's opinion must at least be that the disability most probably resulted from the accidental injury. The employer argues because Dr. Rollins did not state the disability was "most probably" due to her September 1983 injury, Mrs. Scruggs failed to meet her burden of proof. Dr. Rollins testified he thought it was "reasonable to state that her ruptured disc occurred as a result of her injury ... in September of 'Eighty-three." When asked if the ruptured disc most probably resulted from...