We find no error in this determination. As this court stated in Knight v. Cotton Bros. Baking Co., Inc., 473 So.2d 105 (La.App. 3rd Cir. 1985): Whether a claimant's pain is substantial enough to be disabling is a question of fact that must be determined according to the circumstances of each individual case.
Kilgore, Bateman, and Gallien, supra. At the time of Perrodin's injuries, a claimant could be considered disabled if he could work only in substantial pain. Dusang v. Henry C. Beck Builders, Inc., 389 So.2d 367 (La. 1980); Knight v. Cotton Bros. Baking Co., Inc., 473 So.2d 105 (La.App. 3d Cir. 1985). Whether or not pain is substantial enough to render a claimant disabled is a question of fact, and the conclusion of the trier of fact will not be disturbed absent manifest error.
See Hollis v. Travelers Ins. Co., 368 So.2d 154 (La.App. 3rd Cir. 1978). In this regard, the instant case is akin to Knight v. Cotton Bros. Baking Co., Inc., 473 So.2d 105 (La.App. 3rd Cir. 1985), in which a plaintiff with some residual pain was held not to be partially disabled where he had continued to work post-accident and the medical evidence did not corroborate his complaints of substantial pain. Nonetheless, Clement's continued complaints of pain, when coupled with Dr. Phillips' assessment of a 10% impairment of function in plaintiff's neck, do support a conclusion that Clement is entitled to benefits under LSA-R.S. 23:1221(4)(p) for loss of function from a serious and permanent residual impairment:
A worker could be partially disabled under former LSA-R.S. 23:1221(3) when he could not perform the duties required by his former employment but could still do other work. Knight v. Cotton Bros. Baking Co., Inc., 473 So.2d 105 (La.App. 3rd Cir. 1985); Bernard v. Merit Drilling Co., 434 So.2d 1282 (La.App. 3rd Cir. 1983). Partial disability can also include a situation where an employee would experience substantial pain while working in his former occupation, but where he could perform other work without experiencing substantial pain.
[20] DOMENGEAUX, Judge, concurring. I concur merely to distinguish the case of Knight v. Cotton Brothers Baking Company, Inc., 473 So.2d 105 (La.App. 3rd Cir. 1985). Therein, as a member of the panel I agreed to reverse the trial court finding of total and permanent disability based on substantial pain.