Summary 2014 WY 61

Summary of Decision May 12, 2014

Justice Davis delivered the opinion for the court. Affirmed.

Case Name: IN THE MATTER OF THE WORKER’S COMPENSATION CLAIM OF: CHRISTINA S. HIRSCH, AN EMPLOYEE OF BORDER FOODS, INC. v. STATE OF WYOMING ex rel. WYOMING WORKERS’ SAFETY AND COMPENSATION DIVISION

Docket Number: S-13-0162

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

Appeal from the District Court of Teton County the Honorable Timothy C. Day, Judge

Representing Appellant: Jack D. Edwards of Edwards Law Office, P.C., Etna, Wyoming

Representing Appellee: Peter K. Michael, Wyoming Attorney General; John D. Rossetti, Deputy Attorney General; Michael J. Finn, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Samantha Caselli, Assistant Attorney General

Date of Decision: May 12, 2014

Facts: Appellant Christina Hirsch sought worker’s compensation benefits for back pain she believed was related to an earlier workplace accident. The Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) upheld the Wyoming Workers’ Safety and Compensation Division’s (Division) denial of temporary total disability and medical pay benefits, and the district court affirmed the OAH decision. Ms. Hirsch appeals to this Court, claiming that the OAH erred by failing to find a causal connection between the workplace accident and her delayed back pain.

Issues: While Ms. Hirsch raises several issues on appeal, we find the dispositive question to be whether there is substantial evidence to support the OAH’s denial of benefits before a remand from the district court for supplementation of the record. We therefore restate the controlling issue as follows: Were the OAH’s Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence?

Holdings/Conclusion: Ms. Hirsch did not carry her burden of persuading the OAH that the May 2009 incident caused her later back pain. The record contains substantial evidence without the contested supplementation to support the OAH’s initial decision to deny benefits. 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]

Summary 2014 WY 42

Summary of Decision March 31, 2014

Justice Hill delivered the opinion for the Court. Affirmed.

Case Name: ROBERT C. CARSON v. STATE OF WYOMING, ex rel., WYOMING WORKERS’ SAFETY AND COMPENSATION DIVISION

Docket Number: S-13-0144

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

Appeal from the District Court of Teton County the Honorable Timothy C. Day, Judge

Representing Appellant: Katherine L. Mead of Mead & Mead, Jackson, WY

Representing Appellee: Peter K. Michael, Wyoming Attorney General; John D. Rossetti, Deputy Attorney General; Michael J. Finn; Senior Assistant Attorney General; and John A. Brodie, Assistant Attorney General

Date of Decision: March 31, 2014

Facts: On January 19, 2006, Robert Carson and his passenger Hugh Sharp were involved in a serious car accident in Snake River Canyon. Carson sustained multiple injuries, including a severe head injury, and Sharp was killed in the accident. In 2007 the Wyoming Workers’ Safety and Compensation Division (Division) denied Carson’s claims for worker’s compensation benefits because he failed to show that the injuries he sustained in the automobile accident arose out of and in the course of his employment with Metrocities Mortgage, LLC (Metrocities). After a contested case hearing, the Division’s denial of benefits was upheld. Carson did not appeal this determination.

Eight months after the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) denied Carson’s claim for worker’s compensation benefits, a jury sitting in a federal district court case brought by Hugh Sharp’s widow against Carson for wrongful death found that Carson was acting within the course and scope of his employment at the time of the accident. After the federal district court jury verdict, Carson sought to reopen this case contending there was newly discovered evidence to support that he was acting within the course of his employment at the time of the accident. After rulings by the district court and this Court, the OAH eventually affirmed its earlier decision from 2008 that Carson was not acting within the course of his employment.

Issue: Carson presents one issue for our review: As a matter of law, did the OAH commit error when it failed to apply collateral estoppel to the issue of whether Robert Carson was in the course and scope of employment at the time of his injury?

Holdings/Conclusion: We affirm the district court’s order affirming the administrative action taken by the OAH.

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]

Summary 2014 WY 40

Summary of Decision March 21, 2014

Chief Justice Kite delivered the opinion for the Court. Affirmed, as modified.

Case Name: IN THE MATTER OF THE WORKER’S COMPENSATION CLAIM OF: RICHARD J. DELACASTRO v. STATE OF WYOMING, ex rel., WYOMING WORKERS’ SAFETY AND COMPENSATION DIVISION

Docket Number: S-13-0141

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

Appeal from the District Court of Laramie County the Honorable Thomas T.C. Campbell, Judge

Representing Appellant: Robert A. Nicholas, Nicholas Law Office, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee: Peter K. Michael, Wyoming Attorney General; John D. Rossetti, Deputy Attorney General; Michael J. Finn, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Michael T. Kahler, Senior Assistant Attorney General.

Date of Decision: March 21, 2014

Facts: Richard J. Delacastro suffered a work-related injury to his right hip in 2007. In 2009, the State of Wyoming ex rel. Wyoming Workers’ Safety and Compensation Division (the Division) denied, as unrelated to his work injury, requests for testing and treatment of pain in his back. After a contested case hearing, the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) reversed the Division’s final determination, directed payment of Mr. Delacastro’s outstanding medical bills and ordered that one additional test be performed to determine whether his back problems were associated with his work injury. The parties submitted the results of the test, which were normal, and the hearing examiner ordered that Mr. Delacastro was not entitled to further benefits for his back.

Issues: Mr. Delacastro presents the following issues for this Court’s consideration: 1. Is the OAH’s decision denying all future medical benefits for [Mr. Delacastro’s] ongoing right hip and thigh pain supported by substantial evidence, arbitrary or otherwise contrary to law? 2. Is the OAH’s decision denying additional diagnostic testing supported by substantial evidence, arbitrary or otherwise contrary to law . . .?

The Division phrases the issue on appeal as: In 2007, Delacastro injured his right hip, and the Department ruled this was a compensable work place injury. Nearly two years later, in 2009, Delacastro returned to his physician and underwent an MRI to diagnose “back pain.” The Division denied coverage for Delacastro’s 2009 medical treatment, concluding it was unrelated to his 2007 hip injury. At the contested case hearing, Delacastro argued that he actually injured his back in 2007, not his hip, and this 2007 back injury caused his 2009 symptoms. After ordering further investigation, the hearing examiner ruled that Delacastro failed to meet his burden to prove that he suffered a back injury in 2007 and that this back injury caused his symptoms in 2009. Does substantial evidence support the hearing examiner’s decision?

Holdings: The district court affirmed the OAH decision, and Mr. Delacastro appealed to this Court. We conclude substantial evidence supports the OAH decision that Mr. Delacastro did not satisfy his burden of proving additional testing and treatment of his back were related to his work injury; however, we clarify that future treatment associated with the original hip injury may be submitted for administrative review. We affirm, as modified.

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]

Summary 2014 WY 33

Summary of Decision March 5, 2014

Chief Justice Kite delivered the opinion for the Court. Affirmed.

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

Docket Number: S-13-0115

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

Appeal from the District Court of Sweetwater County the Honorable Nena James, Judge

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

Representing Appellee: Peter K. Michael, Wyoming Attorney General; John D. Rossetti, Deputy Attorney General; Michael J. Finn, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Peter Howard, Legal Intern.

Date of Decision: March 5, 2014

Facts: The State of Wyoming ex rel. Wyoming Workers’ Safety and Compensation Division (the Division) denied Bennie Johnson’s requests for preauthorization of bilateral total knee replacements and payment of other medical bills associated with his knees on the grounds the current condition of his knees was not related to a 1992 work injury. The Medical Commission held a contested case hearing and upheld the Division’s decision. During the hearing it admitted into evidence, over Mr. Johnson’s objection, three exhibits.

Issues: Mr. Johnson presents the following issues for this Court’s consideration: ISSUE I. Whether the Commission acted arbitrarily, capriciously or otherwise not in accordance with the law when it admitted into evidence unreliable and irrelevant evidence over objection. ISSUE II. Whether the [Medical Commission’s] decision is supported by substantial evidence. The Division presents the same issues, although they are phrased differently.

Holdings/Conclusion: We conclude the Medical Commission did not commit prejudicial error by admitting the exhibits and substantial evidence supports its decision. We, therefore, affirm.

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]

Summary 2014 WY 25

Summary of Decision February 21, 2014

Justice Burke delivered the opinion of the Court. Affirmed.

Case Name: DEANA V. LANDWEHR, a/k/a DEANA STREUBING v. STATE OF WYOMING, ex rel., WYOMING WORKERS’ SAFETY AND COMPENSATION DIVISION

Docket Number: S-13-0139

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

Appeal from the District Court of Laramie County, the Honorable Thomas T.C. Campbell, Judge

Representing Appellant: Dana J. Lent, Attorney at Law, Torrington, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee: Peter K. Michael, Attorney General; John D. Rossetti, Deputy Attorney General; Michael J. Finn, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Brenda S. Yamaji, Assistant Attorney General.

Date of Decision: February 21, 2014

Facts: The Wyoming Workers’ Safety and Compensation Division awarded benefits to Appellant, Deana Landwehr, after she experienced a workplace injury to her back in 1999. In 2008, Ms. Landwehr experienced a second workplace injury while employed in Nebraska. In 2010, Ms. Landwehr sought payment for prescription medication that she claimed was necessary treatment relating to her 1999 workplace injury. The Division denied the claim. Ms. Landwehr requested a contested case hearing, and the hearing examiner upheld the Division’s denial of benefits. Ms. Landwehr appealed to the district court, which affirmed the hearing examiner’s order. She challenges the district court’s decision in this appeal. We affirm.

Issue: Was the hearing examiner’s determination that Appellant failed to satisfy her burden of proof unsupported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole?

Holdings/Conclusion: In sum, the evidence in this case does not support Ms. Landwehr’s claim that the headaches she experienced in 2010 were related to the initial workplace injury to her mid-back. During the 11 years that elapsed since her initial workplace injury, Ms. Landwehr received at least four MRI’s, all of which were “unremarkable” and returned no objective evidence of a causal connection between her mid-thoracic strain and her claimed symptoms. Also during this time, Ms. Landwehr was diagnosed with carpal tunnel syndrome and fibromyalgia, both of which provide possible explanations for her upper-extremity symptoms, and there is no evidence in the record to suggest that either of these diseases was related to the initial workplace injury. Most importantly, Dr. Hopfensperger’s testimony that the cause of Ms. Landwehr’s headaches was “idiopathic” and “occult” provides absolutely no basis to conclude that her headaches were, more probably than not, the result of her initial back injury in 1999, as opposed to the 2008 workplace injury to her head, for which she received a worker’s compensation settlement in Nebraska. We find substantial evidence to support the hearing examiner’s conclusion that there was no causal connection between Ms. Landwehr’s headaches and her 1999 workplace injury.

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 quotation, 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.]