Before Thomas, P.j., King, And Southwick, JJ.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: King, J.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: June 10, 1997
TRIAL JUDGE: HON. R. KENNETH COLEMAN
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: UNION COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
NATURE OF THE CASE: CIVIL - WORKERS' COMPENSATION
TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED DECISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION FULL COMMISSION
¶1. On February 2, 1993, Onnie Ware suffered an injury at her place of employment, Hillcraft Furniture Company in New Albany, Mississippi. Hillcraft admitted compensability of the injury for the period February 10, 1993 through May 16, 1993 and paid temporary total disability benefits for those months. On July 14, 1994, Ms. Ware filed a petition to controvert with the Workers' Compensation Commission.
¶2. On September 6, 1995, a hearing was held before an administrative law Judge. The administrative law Judge determined that Ms. Ware's period of temporary total disability extended through September 8, 1993, but that permanent disability benefits were not supported by the evidence. Ms. Ware appealed this determination to the Workers' Compensation Full Commission and the circuit court. Both tribunals affirmed the Administrative law Judge's decision. Ms. Ware has now appealed to this Court and assigned four points of error:
"I. THE CIRCUIT COURT ERRED IN AFFIRMING THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE'S/COMMISSION'S FINDING THAT THE PETITIONER WAS TEMPORARILYDISABLED FROM FEBRUARY 2, 1993 UNTIL SEPTEMBER 1993, BASED ON THESUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY.
"II. THE CIRCUIT COURT/COMMISSION ERRED IN AFFIRMING THE ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE'S FINDING THAT BASED UPON A VIDEO TAPE SHOWNOF THE PETITIONER AT A LAUNDROMAT ON SEPTEMBER 10, 1994, SPENDINGTIME OF AN HOUR AND A HALF ON A SATURDAY MORNING, SHOWED NO-INDICATION OF ANY PHYSICAL LIMITATION DURING THIS ACTIVITY, BASEDON THE SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY.
"III. THE CIRCUIT COURT ERRED IN AFFIRMING THE ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE'S/COMMISSION'S FINDING THAT THE PETITIONER HAS NO PERMANENT DISABILITY TO HER ARM, BACK, NECK AND FROM A PSYCHOLOGICALSTANDPOINT BASED ON THE SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARYAND/OR RULING WAS PREDICATED ON AN ERRONEOUS APPLICATION OF THELAW.
"IV. THE CIRCUIT COURT ERRED IN AFFIRMING THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE'S/COMMISSION'S FINDING THAT THE PETITIONER WAS GUILTY OF"BLATANT DOCTOR SHOPPING" BASED ON THE SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TOTHE CONTRARY."
Finding no error, this Court affirms the judgment.
¶3. Ms. Ware was employed as a seamstress by Hillcraft Furniture Company. She performed duties which included sitting at a sewing machine to stitch furniture ...