Crelia v. Rheem Manufacturing Co.
Arkansas Court of Appeals
99 Ark. App. 73, 257 S.W.3d 115 (2007)
Facts
Allie Crelia (plaintiff) was injured while working on a press for Rheem Manufacturing Company (Rheem) (defendant). Four fingers of Crelia’s right hand were amputated. Crelia, who was right-hand dominant, suffered post-traumatic stress disorder from the accident and developed epicondylitis in her left arm due to overcompensating for the injury to her right hand. Crelia also had preexisting problems with ulcers on her feet that limited the time she could spend standing or walking. Crelia had a high school education, had performed factory work all her life, and at the time of her workers’-compensation hearing was 64 years old. Rheem’s insurance carrier accepted a 63 percent impairment rating to Crelia’s right hand, and Crelia also received benefits for the epicondylitis. Crelia underwent a functional-capacity examination and was found to be capable of performing medium work. Rheem offered Crelia a position in janitorial services and was willing to make accommodations for Crelia’s disabilities, including allowing Crelia to sit and stand as needed and to work only in Rheem’s administrative offices, but Crelia turned down the job. The administrative-law judge found that Crelia was not permanently and totally disabled and was therefore not entitled to benefits exceeding the percentage of impairment resulting from the scheduled injuries. The commission affirmed, and Crelia appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Hart, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 705,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,300 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.