Dallas v. Flying J. Inc.

Some evidence supported the appellate division of the State Board of Workers' Compensation's determination that the appellant was not entitled to reinstatement of his workers' compensation benefits, since he failed to cooperate with treatment.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Following a work-related injury, Lester Dallas was awarded temporary total disability benefits under the workers’ compensation scheme. The State Board of Workers’ Compensation “the Board” subsequently suspended Dallas’ benefits for failure to cooperate with medical treatment. Thereafter, Dallas requested that his benefits be reinstated, his weekly payment be increased, and attorney fees be assessed against his employer, Flying J, Inc. “Flying J”. Following a hearing, the Administrative Law Judge “ALJ” reinstated Dallas’ benefits and increased his weekly payment. Flying J appealed to the Board’s appellate division, and Dallas cross-appealed, asserting that the ALJ erred in not deciding whether he was entitled to assessed attorney fees. The appellate division affirmed in part and vacated in part the ALJ’s decision. In particular, it found that Dallas was not entitled to reinstatement of his benefits. Dallas appealed this decision to the superior court, which failed to rule within the time required by OCGA § 34-9-105 b, resulting in an affirmance by operation of law. We granted Dallas’ application for discretionary appeal, and this appeal followed. Finding no error, we affirm.

In resolving Dallas’ appeal, we must keep in mind the various standards of review applicable in this case. The Board’s appellate division is authorized to review the evidence adduced before the ALJ, weigh that evidence, and assess witness credibility.1 If the appellate division determines that the preponderance of evidence supports the ALJ’s decision, it will accept and affirm that award.2 “But, if . . . the appellate division concludes that the award does not meet the applicable evidentiary standards, it may substitute its own alternative findings for those of the ALJ, and enter an award accordingly.”3 The appellate division may “substitute its findings for those of the ALJ only when its alternative findings are supported by some evidence in the record.”4

Dallas v. Flying J. Inc.

Some evidence supported the appellate division of the State Board of Workers' Compensation's determination that the appellant was not entitled to reinstatement of his workers' compensation benefits, since he failed to cooperate with treatment.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report