Summary 2013 WY 40

Summary of Decision April 4, 2013

Justice Burke delivered the opinion for the Court. Affirmed.

Case Name: IN THE MATTER OF THE WORKER’S COMPENSATION CLAIM OF: LANA M. TEGELER v. STATE OF WYOMING, ex rel., WORKERS’ SAFETY AND COMPENSATION DIVISION

Docket Number: S-12-0205

URL: http://www.courts.state.wy.us/Opinions.aspx

Appeal from the District Court of Campbell County, Honorable John R. Perry, Judge.

Representing Appellant: Donna D. Domonkos, Domonkos Law Office, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee: Gregory A. Phillips, Wyoming Attorney General; David L. Delicath, Deputy Attorney General; Michael J. Finn, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Kelly Roseberry, Assistant Attorney General.

Date of Decision: April 4, 2013

Facts: Appellant, Lana Tegeler, challenged a decision from the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) denying her Motion to Reopen Case Persuant to W.R.C.P. 60(b). She sought review of that decision in district court and the district court affirmed. She appealed to this Court.

Issues: Ms. Tegeler presents the following issue:

Whether the Office of Administrative Hearing’s decision to deny Ms. Tegeler’s motion to reopen the case is arbitrary, capricious or otherwise not in accordance with the law.

The Division states the issue as follows:

Did the hearing examiner abuse his discretion in denying Ms. Tegeler’s motion seeking relief under W.R.C.P. 60(b)?

Holdings: Ms. Tegeler renewed her claim that relief is warranted under Rule 60(b) because the physical therapy record indicating that she experienced back pain following her workplace accident “was either mistakenly overlooked or inadvertently not relied upon by trial counsel.” Ms. Tegeler provided no evidence to support her claim that the failure to introduce the physical therapy record in question was caused by “mistake” or “inadvertence” on the part of her trial counsel. Further, the significance of the medical record to Ms. Tegeler’s claim for benefits relating to her lower back is not immediately apparent given that the medical record indicated that Ms. Tegeler experienced pain or an annoyance “in the middle and center of her back.” In light of these deficits in the record, the Court found no abuse of discretion in the OAH’s decision denying Ms. Tegeler’s motion. Affirmed.

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

[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]