Summary 2012 WY 71

Summary of Decision May 22, 2012


[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses the "Universal Citation." It was given an "official" citation when it was issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. You will also note when you look at the opinion that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you need to provide a pinpoint citation to a quote the universal portion of the citation will use that paragraph number. The pinpoint citation in the P.3d portion will need to have the reporter page number. If you need assistance in putting together a citation from this, or any future opinion using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library and we will provide any needed assistance]

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court

Case Name: IN THE MATTER OF THE WORKER’S COMPENSATION CLAIM OF: CATHERINE LYNNETTE MORRIS v. STATE OF WYOMING ex rel. WYOMING WORKERS’ SAFETY AND COMPENSATION DIVISION

Docket Number: S-11-0167

URL:
http://wyomcases.courts.state.wy.us/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=465692

Appeal from the District Court of Natrona County, Honorable Catherine E. Wilking, Judge

Representing Appellant (Plaintiff/Defendant): James C. Worthen of Murane & Bostwick, LLC, Casper, Wyoming

Representing Appellee (Plaintiff/Defendant): Gregory A. Phillips, Wyoming Attorney General; John D. Rossetti, Deputy Attorney General; Michael J. Finn, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Kelly Roseberry, Assistant Attorney General

Date of Decision: May 22, 2012

Facts: Catherine Lynnette Morris (Morris) submitted a worker’s compensation claim for permanent total disability (PTD) benefits, and the Wyoming Workers’ Safety and Compensation Division (Division) denied her claim. Morris sought review by the Wyoming Medical Commission (Commission), which upheld the Division’s denial of benefits. The district court affirmed.

On appeal, Morris did not contend that the Commission’s decision was unsupported by substantial evidence or that the Commission misapplied the law. Morris instead challenged two evidentiary rulings by the Commission: 1) the admission of a psychological report produced after the discovery cutoff; and 2) a limitation on the scope of Morris’ testimony to matters not testified to in the Division’s discovery deposition of Morris.

Issues: Morris presents the following issues on appeal:

Issue 1 – Did the Hearing Officer err when he admitted the expert report of Dr. Kenneth Bell into evidence?

Issue 2 – Did the Hearing Officer err when he denied Ms. Morris the opportunity to present live testimony before the Medical Commission on matters previously discussed in her discovery deposition?

Holdings: The Court found no abuse of discretion in the Commission’s admission of Dr. Bell’s psychological report, but found that the Commission did abuse its discretion in the limitation it placed on the testimony of Morris. Morris did not object below to that limitation, however, and the Court concluded she waived her right to appeal that issue. The decision of the Commission is affirmed.

Justice Golden delivered the opinion for the court.