00-09114-G-9677. Simmons vs. Kellwood Co.

• Case Date: October 21, 2005
• Court: Mississippi

Mississippi Worker Compensation 2005. 00-09114-G-9677. Simmons vs. Kellwood Co STELLA SIMMONS CLAIMANT VS. KELLWOOD COMPANY SELF-INSURED EMPLOYER MISSISSIPPI WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION MWCC NO. 00 09114-G-9677Appearing for the claimant: Jonathon B. Fairbank, Attorney at Law, Jackson, Mississippi Appearing for the employer. self-insured: H. Byron Carter, Attorney at Law, Jackson, Mississippi FULL COMMISSION ORDER The above captioned cause came on to be heard on September 26, 2005, before the Mississippi Workers' Compensation Commission at its offices in Jackson, Mississippi, on the employer's "Petition for Review". After consideration of the record in this cause, the arguments of counsel, the briefs submitted and the applicable law, the Commission affirms the findings of fact of the Administrative Judge, but amends her award. We have no quarrel with the Judge's findings, and we believe that they adequately and accurately reflect the record before us. We note that many of the factual issues in this case have been stipulated to by the parties, leaving only three issues for consideration, those being (1) the amount of temporary disability, if any, attributable to claimant's early 2000 injury, (2) the amount of permanent disability, if any, attributable to the injury, and (3) the question of whether or not the treatments rendered by Dr. Mtchell following claimant's onset of breast cancer are reasonable, necessary and relevant to the claimant's recovery from her early 2000 injury at Kellwood. In applying the Judge's findings of fact, which we adopt, to the questions before us, however, our decision diverges from that of Judge Dixon in the following ways: 1. We believe the facts support a period of temporary disability for the cla imant. 2. We believe the facts support an award of permanent disability for the cla imant, but we do not believe the facts support permanent total disability as a result of the injury at Kellwood. 3. We concur with Judge Dixon as to her award ofmedical treatment for the cl aimant, including the services of Dr. Mitchell. ANALYSIS Based on the evidence before us, we find that the claimant was temporarily and totally disabled for a period of time commencing March 21, 2000 and continuing through March 4, 2004, when she reached maximum medical improvement, according to her surgeon, Dr. Mitchell. Thus, she is...