Dent v. E. Richland Cnty. Pub. Serv. Dist.

I respectfully dissent because I believe we are constrained by our standard of review to affirm the Appellate Panel's finding that Dent was not permanently and totally disabled (PTD) under section 42-9-10 of the South Carolina Code (2015). The Appellate Panel determined Dent was not PTD under section 42-9-10 because he could perform medium duty work and, thus, had not lost his earning capacity. See Fields v. Owens Corning Fiberglas , 301 S.C. 554, 555, 393 S.E.2d 172, 173 (1990) (explaining a finding of disability under section 42-9-10"must be predicated upon a showing of a loss of earning…