Williams v. Allegis Group ( 2012 )


Menu:
  • THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE
    CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING
    EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.
    THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
    In The Court of Appeals
    Harry Williams, Appellant,
    v.
    Allegis Group & American Home Assurance,
    Respondents.
    Appellate Case No. 2011-184146
    Appeal From Richland County
    J. Ernest Kinard, Jr., Circuit Court Judge
    Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-530
    Submitted August 1, 2012 – Filed September 19, 2012
    AFFIRMED
    Thomas Pinckney Bellinger, of McWhirter Bellinger &
    Associates, PA, of Lexington, for Appellant.
    Stephen Lynwood Brown, Francis Drake Rogers, III, and
    Russell Grainger Hines, all of Young Clement Rivers,
    LLP, of Charleston, for Respondents.
    PER CURIAM: Harry Williams (Employee) appeals the circuit court's order
    affirming the order of the Appellate Panel of the South Carolina Workers'
    Compensation Commission (Appellate Panel) awarding him fifteen percent
    permanent partial disability for his back. On appeal, Employee argues the circuit
    court erred in finding substantial evidence exists to support the Appellate Panel's
    finding Employee was not entitled to permanent total disability for his back.
    Because we find substantial evidence exists to support the circuit court's order
    affirming the Appellate Panel's finding Williams was not permanently and totally
    disabled and his injury was limited to his back, we affirm1 pursuant to Rule
    220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities:
    1.    As to whether the circuit court erred in finding substantial evidence existed
    to support the Appellate Panel's finding that the injury was limited to the back:
    
    S.C. Code Ann. § 42-9-10
     (Supp. 2011) (providing three ways for a claimant to
    obtain total disability); 
    S.C. Code Ann. § 42-9-30
     (1976 and Supp. 2011)
    (providing for scheduled member injuries); Singleton v. Young Lumber Co., 
    236 S.C. 454
    , 471, 
    114 S.E.2d 837
    , 845 (1960) ("Where the injury is confined to the
    scheduled member, and there is no impairment of any other part of the body
    because of such injury, the employee is limited to the scheduled compensation,
    even though other considerations such as age, lack of training, or other conditions
    peculiar to the individual, effect a total or partial industrial incapacity. To obtain
    compensation in addition to that scheduled for the injured member, claimant must
    show that some other part of his body is affected." (emphasis added)).
    2.    As to Employee's loss of earning capacity argument: Futch v. McAllister
    Towing of Georgetown, Inc., 
    335 S.C. 598
    , 613, 
    518 S.E.2d 591
    , 598 (1999)
    (noting an appellate court need not address appellant's remaining issues when its
    determination of a prior issue is dispositive); Therrell v. Jerry's Inc., 
    370 S.C. 22
    ,
    26 n.2, 
    633 S.E.2d 893
    , 895 n.2 (2006) ("To seek a general disability award, a
    claimant who has suffered a scheduled injury must show that the injury affects
    some other part of his body and has resulted in a loss of earning capacity." (citing
    Singleton v. Young Lumber Co., 
    236 S.C. 454
    , 471, 
    114 S.E.2d 837
    , 845 (1960)
    (emphasis added))).
    AFFIRMED.
    HUFF, THOMAS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.
    1
    We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2012-UP-530

Filed Date: 9/19/2012

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/22/2024