Burnette v. City of Greenville
401 S.C. 417
| S.C. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Burnette appeals a circuit court decision affirming the Workers’ Compensation Commission’s ruling on June 2007 injuries.
- The Commission found no injury to Burnette’s lower back from the June 2007 incident and limited benefits accordingly.
- Burnette had prior 2003 back injuries with a 17.5% back disability and 2004 MRI/2005–2006 treatment history.
- June 2007 incident allegedly aggravated a preexisting lumbar condition, with later MRIs showing limited lumbar pathology.
- Neck surgery in 2008 and subsequent cervical impairment forms part of Burnette’s overall disability context; lumbar issues remained disputed.
- The court remanded to determine lumbar injury findings and recalibrate disability rating; credibility issue left undecided.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did Burnette injure or aggravate her lower back in June 2007? | Burnette's evidence shows lumbar injury/aggravation. | Record supports no lumbar injury or aggravation from 2007 incident. | Reversed; remand for lumbar findings |
| Is Burnette permanently and totally disabled considering preexisting impairments and the 2007 injuries? | Disability rating should reflect lumbar injury plus preexisting impairments. | Disability determination previously supported; no total disability found. | Remanded for recalculation after lumbar findings |
| Should credibility be addressed given other dispositive issues? | Credibility supported by testimonial and medical records. | Credibility not central if lumbar injury unresolved. | Not addressed due to dispositive issues |
Key Cases Cited
- Pierre v. Seaside Farms, Inc., 386 S.C. 534 (2010) (APA standard; substantial rights review)
- Lark v. Bi-Lo, Inc., 276 S.C. 130 (1981) (substantial evidence standard in review)
- Mullinax v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., 318 S.C. 431 (1995) (aggravation of preexisting condition principle)
- Potter v. Spartanburg Sch. Dist. 7, 395 S.C. 17 (Ct.App.2011) (deference to medical versus other competent evidence)
- Edwards v. Pettit Constr. Co., Inc., 273 S.C. 576 (1979) (evidence basis for Commission findings; cannot rely on conjecture)
- Grayson v. Carter Rhoad Furniture, 317 S.C. 306 (1995) (restrictions on speculative factual findings)
- Sanders v. MeadWestvaco Corp., 371 S.C. 284 (Ct.App.2006) (lay testimony admissible for impairment questions)
- Sigmon v. Dayco Corp., 316 S.C. 260 (Ct.App.1994) (impairment assessment and Board/Commission authority)