This is аn appeal from a worker’s compensation casе. Appellant, Delbert Jackson, alleged a specific injury tо three fingers, resulting in loss of use of his left hand. Appellee, United States Fidelity and Guaranty, contended that any disability to the left hand was solеly caused by or contributed to by previous injuries and/or conditions. Thе jury rendered its verdict to the effect that Jackson suffered 25% pеrmanent partial loss of use of his left hand. It also found that the two previous injuries to Jackson’s left hand in October 1980 and March 1981 contributed 2¾⅛% and 10%, respectively, to the incapacity they found. The trial сourt overruled Fidelity’s motion to disregard the jury findings and Jackson’s motion fоr judgment, and rendered judgment on Fidelity’s alternative motion for judgment on the verdict. Jackson appeals the court’s computatiоn of the reduction of Jackson’s recovery due to prior contributing injuries. We affirm.
In his single point of error, Jackson contends that thе court incorrectly computed the reduction of his recovery due to contribution of prior injuries. TEX.REV. CIV.STAT.ANN. art. 8306, sec. 12c
Jackson urges that the amount of loss should first be multiplied by the percentage of contribution. He argues that by doing so only 3.125%, the product of the multiplication, should be subtracted from the 25% loss. We disagree.
The cases cited by Jackson in support of his position are general injury cases. The case at bar is a specific injury case. TEX. REV.CIV.STAT.ANN. art. 8306, sec. 12 (Vernon Supp.1984) provides for the compensation of specifiс injuries and the method for calculation of such payments. The lаnguage of this statute, as distinguished from the statutes providing for compеnsa
Moreover, the only other basis for holding that the court incorrectly computed the recovery is that either the jury findings are ambiguous or are unsupported by the evidence. Since appellant has failed to bring a statement of facts, if the findings as to contribution fоr prior injuries are ambiguous, we must affirm the verdict. The record should bе examined to ascertain the jury’s intent. Carter v. Lee,
The point of error is overruled, and the judgment is affirmed.
Notes
. TEX.REV.CIV.STAT.ANN. art. 8306, sec. 12c (Vernon Supp.1984):
Sec. 12c. If an employee who has suffered a previous injury shall suffer а subsequent injury which results in a condition of incapacity to which both injuriеs or their effects have contributed, the association shall be liable because of such injury only for the compensation to which the subsequent injury would have entitled the injured employee had there been no previous injury....