Rankin v. Averitt Express, Inc.
115 So. 3d 874
Miss. Ct. App.2013Background
- Rankin worked for Averitt Express as a supply-chain solutions driver, delivering to Dollar General stores in MS and LA.
- Rolltainers weighing 200–1,000 pounds were used for freight; Rankin unloaded them with a motorized lift.
- On Oct 1, 2009 Rankin alleges a 1,000-pound rolltainer pinned him, causing chest/right-arm pain; he reported a broken fan belt later that day.
- Ambulance/ER records did not note a work injury or the rolltainer incident; Rankin later told Henderson about a work injury without details.
- Rankin claims a second injury on Dec 2, 2009 when attempting to stop a rolltainer; he reported this after a subsequent delivery.
- Averitt paid Rankin’s medical bills and TTD from Oct 2009 to Apr 2010; AJ found two work-related injuries and awarded benefits, which the Commission reversed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the motion to strike and sanctions were correctly denied | Rankin argues Averitt referenced new evidence and deposition testimony not admitted at the AJ hearing. | Rankin’s deposition and brief cites were supported by the hearing record; no rule violation occurred. | No reversible error; denial affirmed. |
| Whether the Commission properly denied benefits due to lack of medical causation proof | Rankin contends medical evidence supports causation from work injuries. | Averitt argues doctors declined to give causation opinions; Rankin failed to prove causation medically. | Affirmed; substantial evidence supports denial of causation. |
| Whether substantial evidence supports the Commission’s denial of benefits | Rankin maintains the AJ’s findings are supported by medical opinion and testimony. | Commission found Rankin’s testimony uncorroborated and medical opinions lacking. | Affirmed; Commission’s denial upheld. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hedge v. Leggett & Platt Inc., 641 So.2d 9 (Miss. 1994) (causation must be proven with competent medical proof)
- Shipp v. Thomas & Betts, 18 So.3d 332 (Miss. Ct. App. 2009) (medical causation generally requires expert testimony)
- Anthony v. Town of Marion, 90 So.3d 682 (Miss. Ct. App. 2012) (causation proof must be by reasonable medical probability)
- Airtran v. Byrd, 953 So.2d 296 (Miss. Ct. App. 2007) (medical causation standard for disability)
- Robinson Prop. Group v. Newton, 975 So.2d 256 (Miss. Ct. App. 2007) (due process requires following agency procedural rules)
- Binswanger Mirror v. Wright, 947 So.2d 346 (Miss. Ct. App. 2006) (deference to Commission procedural rulings rarely reversed)
- Holman v. Standard Oil Co. of Ky., 242 Miss. 657, 136 So.2d 591 (Miss. 1962) (doubtful cases resolved in favor of compensation)