Cite as 2016 Ark. App. 188
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION I
No. CV-15-947
OPINION DELIVERED APRIL 6, 2016
MICHELLE LAWSON
APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE ARKANSAS
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION
V. COMMISSION
[NO. G302843]
PRATT & WHITNEY; AIG CLAIMS
APPELLEES AFFIRMED
ROBERT J. GLADWIN, Chief Judge
Appellant Michelle Lawson appeals the July 13, 2015 opinion of the Arkansas
Workers’ Compensation Commission (“Commission”) that affirmed and adopted the
February 2, 2015 opinion of the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). The ALJ found that
Lawson failed to meet her burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that she
is entitled to additional medical treatment/pain management or payment for medications
from Dr. Karl Haws for her March 18, 2013 compensable lumbar injury. Lawson argues
that the Commission’s opinion is not supported by substantial evidence. Having reviewed
the evidence presented, we disagree and affirm by issuing this memorandum opinion.
We may issue memorandum opinions in any or all of the following cases:
(a) Where the only substantial question involved is the sufficiency of the evidence;
(b) Where the opinion, or findings of fact and conclusions of law, of the trial court
or agency adequately explain the decision and we affirm;
Cite as 2016 Ark. App. 188
(c) Where the trial court or agency does not abuse its discretion and that is the only
substantial issue involved; and
(d) Where the disposition of the appeal is clearly controlled by a prior holding of this
court or the Arkansas Supreme Court and we do not find that our holding should be
changed or that the case should be certified to the supreme court.
In re Memorandum Opinions, 16 Ark. App. 301, 700 S.W.2d 63 (1985).
This case falls within categories (a) and (b). The only substantial question on appeal
is whether the Commission’s opinion was supported by sufficient evidence. A review of the
record reflects that it was. Further, the opinion of the ALJ, adopted by the Commission,
adequately explained the decision reached. Accordingly, we affirm by memorandum
opinion.
Affirmed.
HARRISON and WHITEAKER, JJ., agree.
Tolley & Brooks, P.A., by: Evelyn E. Brooks, for appellant.
Worley, Wood & Parrish, P.A., by: Jarrod S. Parrish, for appellees.
2