Trimble v. N. Pacific Group, Inc.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Cite as 2009 Ark. App. 798
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION II
No. CA09-406
Opinion Delivered
RONNY L. TRIMBLE
December 2, 2009
V.
APPEAL FROM THE ARKANSAS
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION
COMMISSION [NO. F313011]
NORTH PACIFIC GROUP, INC.
APPELLEE
AFFIRMED
APPELLANT
JOHN MAUZY PITTMAN, Judge
This workers’ compensation case involves a claimant who was treated for many years
for a compensable right-knee injury, and who much later claimed a compensable left-knee
injury. The Commission denied the claim, noting that claimant-appellant’s testimony was
self-contradictory and that appellant had been able to construct a fair-sized building by himself
between the time that he was treated for his right knee and the commencement of his claim
for a left-knee injury.
Appellant argues that the evidence was insufficient because his physician’s testimony
regarding the origin of his left-knee injury went unrebutted. We find no error. Where, as
here, the Commission has denied a claim because of the claimant’s failure to meet his burden
of proof, the substantial evidence standard of review requires that we affirm if the
Commission’s opinion displays a substantial basis for the denial of relief. Williams v. Arkansas
Cite as 2009 Ark. App. 798
Oak Flooring Co., 267 Ark. 810, 590 S.W.2d 328 (Ark. App. 1979). Here, the Commission
found that appellant was not a credible witness, noting numerous inconsistencies and selfcontradictions in his testimony. Given that the physician’s opinion was based largely on the
history provided by appellant, appellant’s subsequent work history and self-contradictory
testimony raise sufficient questions regarding his credibility to justify a finding that he failed
to prove entitlement to benefits.
Because the only substantial question on appeal is the sufficiency of the evidence, and
because the Commission’s opinion adequately explains the decision, we affirm by
memorandum opinion. In re: Memorandum Opinions, 16 Ark. App. 301, 700 S.W.2d 63
(1985).
Affirmed.
KINARD and BAKER, JJ., agree.
-2-
CA09-406
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
