EARL RANDALL MAGGARD V. CASEY INDUSTRIAL, INC.; SPECIAL FUND; ZARING P. ROBERTSON, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE; WORKERS' COMPENSATION BOARD
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
RENDERED:
August 16, 1996; 2:00 p.m.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
NO. 96-CA-0751-WC
EARL RANDALL MAGGARD
APPELLANT
PETITION FOR REVIEW OF A DECISION
OF THE WORKERS' COMPENSATION BOARD
ACTION NO. WC-94-030960
V.
CASEY INDUSTRIAL, INC.;
SPECIAL FUND; ZARING P. ROBERTSON,
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE;
WORKERS' COMPENSATION BOARD
APPELLEES
OPINION AFFIRMING
* * * * * * * * * *
BEFORE:
COMBS, GARDNER and GUDGEL, Judges.
GARDNER, JUDGE.
Earl Randall Maggard (Maggard) appeals from a
decision of the Workers' Compensation Board (the board) which
affirmed a decision of the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) holding
that Maggard failed to prove that he had incurred a work-related
injury to his back resulting in disability.
We affirm.
Maggard worked for Casey Industrial, Inc. (Casey).
Maggard alleged that on June 13, 1994, in the course and scope of
his employment with Casey, he suffered a heat stroke and as a
result, fell and struck his back.
He contended that this aroused
a dormant back condition resulting in disability.
The ALJ in an opinion of September 23, 1995, concluded
that Maggard failed to meet his burden of proving that he
suffered a back injury at work on June 13, 1994.
In so doing, he
determined that the testimony of the primary testifying physician
was not reliable as a result of the physician's outside
relationship with Maggard and his belligerent attitude upon
examination.
The board in an opinion of February 16, 1996,
affirmed the ALJ's opinion.
Maggard on appeal to this Court contends that the
evidence in this case compels a finding that he aggravated a
dormant, preexisting injury to his back as a result of the
alleged work-related injury, and the ALJ's ruling to the contrary
was erroneous.
After reviewing the record, we cannot conclude
that the evidence compelled a finding in Maggard's favor.
Special Fund v. Francis, Ky., 708 S.W.2d 641 (1986).
See
The ALJ
provided sufficient reasons for rejecting the evidence by the
testifying physician.
See Paramount Foods, Inc. v. Burkhardt,
Ky., 695 S.W.2d 418 (1985).
We cannot conclude that the board
misconstrued the law or erroneously assessed the evidence so
flagrantly as to cause gross injustice in affirming the ALJ.
See
Western Baptist Hospital v. Kelly, Ky., 827 S.W.2d 735 (1992).
For the foregoing reasons, the decision of the Workers'
Compensation Board is affirmed.
ALL CONCUR.
-2-
BRIEF FOR APPELLANT:
BRIEF FOR APPELLEE
CASEY INDUSTRIAL, INC.:
Warren A. Taylor
Hazard, KY
Stanley S. Dawson
Lexington, KY
BRIEF FOR APPELLEE
SPECIAL FUND:
Angeline B. Golden
Louisville, KY
-3-
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.
