A.E.R.T., Inc. v. Estrada
2016 Ark. App. 604
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Maria Estrada worked for A.E.R.T., Inc. lifting and stacking wood 12-hour shifts for over five years and sought treatment for back pain beginning in late 2009/2010.
- She claimed a gradual-onset low-back injury culminating in surgery (August 30, 2012) and filed a workers’ compensation claim alleging work-relatedness.
- The Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission initially denied the claim on statute-of-limitations grounds; the Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for adjudication on the merits.
- On remand the administrative law judge (ALJ) found insufficient objective medical findings to prove a compensable work-related injury; the Full Commission reversed, finding objective findings (MRI/CT) and causation established and awarding benefits from September 28, 2012.
- A.E.R.T. appealed, arguing the Commission misweighed evidence and manufactured causation findings; Estrada cross-appealed the Commission’s denial of benefits back to February 2012 for lack of timely employer notice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to prove compensable gradual-onset back injury (causation/objective findings) | Estrada: objective findings (MRI/CT, surgery) and work duties support causal link; expert opinion not required. | AERT: no treating physician expressly opined work caused injury; claimant failed to present objective findings linking injury to work. | Commission decision affirmed: objective findings and testimony supported causation by a preponderance; expert causation opinion not required in every case. |
| Whether Commission ‘manufactured’ medical opinions / misrepresented records | Estrada: Commission accurately summarized medical records and work history to infer causation. | AERT: Commission misstated or invented medical statements (e.g., mis-citing Dr. Schemel and Dr. Sewell). | Court found mis-citations immaterial; Commission’s summary of records and factual inferences were within its fact‑finding discretion and affirmed. |
| Start date of benefits / employer notice under Ark. Code §11-9-701 | Estrada: employer had actual notice earlier (she told supervisors and was moved to lighter duty); benefits should start February 2012. | AERT: no formal AR-C notice until Sept. 28, 2012; employer lacked knowledge that condition was work-related. | Commission’s finding upheld: claimant did not prove employer had notice of a work-related injury before Sept. 28, 2012; benefits start date affirmed as Sept. 28, 2012. |
Key Cases Cited
- Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. VanWagner, 337 Ark. 443 (Ark. 1999) (medical causation not required in every workers’ compensation gradual-onset case)
- Freeman v. Con-Agra Frozen Foods, 344 Ark. 296 (Ark. 2001) (standard of review for Commission fact findings)
- Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Leach, 74 Ark. App. 231 (Ark. Ct. App. 2001) (upholding award for gradual-onset back injury based on job duties and lack of preexisting herniation)
- Wise v. Vill. Inn, 467 S.W.3d 186 (Ark. Ct. App. 2015) (Commission may disbelieve claimant testimony and accept only portions it finds credible)