LVL, Inc. v. Ragsdale, 381 S.W.3d 869

LVL, Inc. appeals the Workers’ Compensation Commission’s June 1, 2010 decision awarding Donald Ragsdale additional medical treatment related to his December 2006 neck injury that led to a C6-7 discectomy and fusion.
LVL’s sole point on appeal is that substantial evidence does not support the 2009 treatment recommendation by pain-management specialist Dr. Raymond Greaser.
Ragsdale sustained a compensable neck injury in 2006; he underwent cervical surgery (C6-7) in 2007 and received subsequent pain-management care.
Dr. Greaser sought preauthorization for spinal-cord and peripheral-nerve-field neurostimulation therapies, arguing long-standing, debilitating pain despite conservative measures.
An ALJ found the proposed neurostimulation treatment reasonably necessary as a medical expense related to the compensable injury, and the Commission adopted that decision, affirming the award.
On appeal, the court reviews whether there is substantial evidence to support the Commission’s determination that the neurostimulation treatments were reasonably necessary medical treatment for the compensable neck injury.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for treatment	Ragsdale	LVL	Affirmed; substantial evidence supports the award

Murphy v. Forsgren, Inc., 258 S.W.3d 794 (Ark. App. 2007) (substantial-evidence standard for workers’-compensation medical awards)
Hargis Transp. v. Chesser, 190 S.W.3d 309 (Ark. App. 2004) (credibility and conflict resolution in appellate review)
ITT/Higbie Mfg. v. Gilliam, 807 S.W.2d 44 (Ark. App. 1991) (commission adoption of ALJ findings and evidentiary deference)
Oak Grove Lumber Co. v. Highfill, 968 S.W.2d 637 (Ark. App. 1998) (commission’s authority to interpret medical evidence)
Pyle v. Woodfield, Inc., 306 S.W.3d 455 (Ark. App. 2009) (appellate review of medical-evidence weight and credibility)