Malinski v. Industrial Commission

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing the ALJ’s duty to resolve all evidentiary conflicts in the evidence and draw warranted inferences, which will not be disturbed unless the conclusion is unreasonable
• explaining that when there is a conflict between two experts, the ALJ is to weigh the conflicting evidence, judge witness credibility, and determine which opinion to rely on
• stating that claimant has the burden to affirmatively establish entitlement to compensation
• stating the ALJ must draw warranted inferences and “where more than one inference may be drawn, the [ALJ] is at liberty to choose either, and this court will not disturb its conclusion unless it is wholly unreasonable”
• “[I]t is the hearing officer’s obligation to resolve conflicting medical evidence, and his resolution will not be disturbed unless it is wholly unreasonable.”
• requiring the ALJ to resolve all conflicts in the evidence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).