Medical evidence supports finding that lifting at work precipitated heart attack.

The importance of a physician’s overall testimony, as opposed to a couple of particular statements, determines whether it is unequivocal so as to support a claim of a work-related injury. In this case, the claimant moved kegs of beer for the employer and developed chest pain that recurred two days later while lifting a heavy pot of chili. The claimant was hospitalized and thereafter underwent quintuple bypass surgery after which the employer replaced him at work. Medical evidence in support of a claim petition indicated that the lifting incidents “certainly could have precipitated and probably did precipitate the incident” and were “very likely” to have done so. The Workers' Compensation Judge rejected such evidence as equivocal. On appeal, however, the court reversed, finding that the doctor’s further statements that the incidents certainly caused the claimant's hospitalization and heart attack and that lab studies after the events were indicative of a heart attack. In consideration that the claimant only reported problems after the work activities indicate that, on the whole, the medical evidence was not equivocal.

Case Law Alert - 2nd Qtr 2012