Vijil v. Schlumberger Technology Corp.
2013 Ark. App. 346
Ark. Ct. App.2013Background
- Vijil, employed by Schlumberger Technology Corp. since 2005, lifted very large tools on July 2, 2006 at the work site.
- He felt a midsection back twitch/muscle spasm during tool handling and continued work that shift.
- Over the next two weeks he developed numbness in the left leg, spreading to left arm and chest; cardiologist referral followed.
- Neurologist Dr. Griggs and radiologist Dr. Standefer diagnosed cervical spine herniations (C4-5, C5-6, C6-7) with severe cord compression and recommended surgery.
- Vijil filed a workers’ compensation claim; ALJ denied benefits on July 29, 2009, finding objective injury but no compensable causal link.
- Commission affirmed on March 17, 2010; a dissenter argued substantial evidence supported compensability; case subsequently remanded and reconsidered multiple times.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Commission had substantial evidence of a causal link | Vijil argues evidence supports causal link between July 2 incident and cervical injury. | Schlumberger contends lack of credible evidence showing work incident caused cervical pathology. | No substantial evidence of causation; claim denied. |
| Credibility of witnesses and medical causation | Vijil and Rushing testimony could prove work-related injury; medical opinions should be weighed. | Employer witnesses corroborate no report of injury; doctors’ notes misstate history and credibility is low. | Commission’s credibility determinations supported the denial. |
| Effect of failure to report incident timely | Delayed reporting was not fatal; other evidence supports causation. | Lack of timely reporting undermines causal link and credibility. | Evidence supported rejection of causal link; failure to report timely weighed against claimant. |
| Weight given to medical evidence | Medical records and expert opinions could establish compensable injury. | Doctor Standefer’s September 5, 2006 notation derived from Vijil’s history, which was found not credible. | Medical evidence given minimal weight; combined with credibility findings supports denial. |
Key Cases Cited
- Searcy Indus. Laundry, Inc. v. Ferren, 82 Ark.App. 69 (Ark. App. 2003) (causal relation required for compensable injury)
- Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Westbrook, 77 Ark.App. 167 (Ark. App. 2002) (scope of causal connection; factual credibility matters)
- Rippe v. Delbert Hooten Logging, 100 Ark. App. 227 (Ark. App. 2007) (preponderance standard for compensation)
- Jeter v. B.R. McGinty Mech., 62 Ark.App. 53 (Ark. App. 1998) (credibility and weight of witness testimony are for the Commission)
- Murphy v. Forsgren, Inc., 99 Ark.App. 223 (Ark. App. 2007) (weighing medical testimony and credibility)
- Swift-Eckrich, Inc. v. Brock, 63 Ark.App. 118 (Ark. App. 1998) (review of medical basis for opinions by the Commission)
- Farmers Co-op. v. Biles, 77 Ark.App. 1 (Ark. App. 2002) (standard for factual determinations by Commission)
- St. Joseph’s Mercy Med. Ctr. v. Redmond, 2012 Ark. App. 7 (Ark. App. 2012) (substantial evidence standard for review)