Parker v. Advanced Portable X-Ray, LLC
2014 Ark. App. 11
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Connie Parker, an APX employee, was rear-ended on Sept 29, 2011 while driving a company van and suffered compensable cervical and thoracic injuries.
- APX paid Parker regular wages while she was off work but terminated her employment on Jan 26, 2012 before medical release; last paycheck covered period ending Jan 15, 2012.
- Parker filed an EEOC charge alleging ADA wrongful termination; in April 2012 APX settled via mediation, paying $60,000 (taxes withheld) characterized in the settlement as "lost wages," and Parker resigned the next day.
- Parker pursued workers’ compensation for medical benefits, temporary-total-disability (TTD) benefits (from Jan 16, 2012 onward), and attorney’s fees; ALJ awarded compensability, medical benefits, and TTD but denied APX a credit for the EEOC settlement proceeds.
- The Full Commission reversed the ALJ on the credit issue, granting APX a $60,000 credit under Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-807(b) (employee not entitled to compensation during period she receives full wages), but it declined to apply judicial estoppel and affirmed TTD.
- On appeal, the court reversed and remanded as to the statutory credit (Commission failed to make adequate findings linking "lost wages" to "full wages" under § 11-9-807(b)); affirmed the Commission’s refusal to apply judicial estoppel and affirmed the award of TTD.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether APX is entitled to a $60,000 credit under Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-807 for settlement proceeds characterized as "lost wages" | Parker: settlement proceeds were not wages for the period of disability; Commission lacked proof to treat them as "full wages" | APX: settlement paid $60,000 as "lost wages" (taxes withheld) and thus constitutes "full wages," entitling APX to statutory credit | Reversed and remanded — Commission failed to make sufficient findings tying the settlement to "full wages" under § 11-9-807(b); further factfinding required |
| Whether Parker is judicially estopped from claiming TTD because of purportedly inconsistent EEOC positions, and whether TTD award is supported by substantial evidence | Parker: EEOC position (ability to work with accommodation) was not a judicially accepted position in an earlier case and does not bar her TTD claim; she remains entitled to benefits | APX: Parker’s EEOC statements are inconsistent with her workers’ comp claim and should estop her from TTD; alternatively, no substantial evidence supports TTD award | Affirmed — judicial estoppel inapplicable because prior EEOC matter was settled (not a prior judicial proceeding relied on by a court); substantial evidence supports TTD from Jan 16, 2012 onward |
Key Cases Cited
- Dupwe v. Wallace, 355 Ark. 521, 140 S.W.3d 464 (Ark. 2004) (defines Arkansas elements of judicial estoppel and distinguishes it from the broader doctrine against inconsistent positions)
- New Hampshire v. Maine, 532 U.S. 742 (2001) (judicial-estoppel standard that earlier position must have been judicially accepted)
- Cagle Fabricating & Steel, Inc. v. Patterson, 309 Ark. 365, 830 S.W.2d 857 (1992) (remand appropriate when agency fails to make adequate findings for appellate review)
- Pharmerica v. Seratt, 103 Ark. App. 9, 285 S.W.3d 699 (Ark. Ct. App. 2008) (Commission reviews appealed cases de novo and must make independent findings)
- St. Edward Mercy Med. Ctr. v. Howard, 424 S.W.3d 881 (Ark. Ct. App. 2012) (workers’ compensation statutes are strictly construed)