Page:Gansky v. Hi-Tech Engineering.pdf/1

---

---

Rick GANSKY v. HI-TECH ENGINEERING; ITT Hartford

Supreme Court of Arkansas
Opinion delivered June 24, 1996

1. WORKERS' COMPENSATION—SUPREME COURT REVIEW.—The Arkansas Supreme Court reviews a workers' compensation case under Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 1-2(f) as though it had originally been filed in the supreme court.
2. WORKERS' COMPENSATION—REASONABLE AND NECESSARY TREATMENT—QUESTION OF FACT FOR COMMISSION.—What constitutes reasonable and necessary treatment under Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-508(a) (1987) is a question of fact for the Arkansas Workers' Compensation Commission.
3. WORKERS' COMPENSATION—STANDARD OF REVIEW.—In reviewing a workers' compensation case, the appellate court views the evidence and all reasonable inferences therefrom in the light most favorable to the Commission's decision and affirms that decision when it is supported by substantial evidence; the Commission's decision will be affirmed unless fair-minded persons with the same facts before them could not have arrived at the conclusion reached by the Commission.
4. WORKERS' COMPENSATION—CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES WITHIN PROVINCE OF COMMISSION.—The credibility of witnesses is a matter exclusively within the province of the Workers' Compensation Commission.
5. WORKERS' COMPENSATION—TEMPORARY AGGRAVATION OF PREEXISTING CONDITION IS COMPENSABLE INJURY.—The temporary aggravation of a pre-existing condition is a compensable injury.
6. WORKERS' COMPENSATION—FAIR-MINDED PERSONS COULD NOT DECIDE THAT ADDITIONAL MEDICAL TREATMENT WAS NOT REASONABLY NECESSARY OR THAT APPELLANT'S HEALING PERIOD HAD ENDED.—Where the treating neurosurgeon prescribed a functional-capacity assessment for appellant employee that was not performed because appellee employer would not pay for it, the supreme court could not agree with the Commission that additional medical treatment was not