Summary 2014 WY 12

Summary of Decision January 24, 2014

Justice Davis delivered the opinion for the Court. Affirmed.

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

Docket Number: S-13-0108

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

Appeal from the District Court of Uinta County the Honorable Dennis L. Sanderson, 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; Samantha Caselli, Assistant Attorney General

Date of Decision: January 24, 2014

Facts: A score of years ago, Appellant Shirlene Hathaway was attacked by a patient and suffered modest physical injuries while working at the Wyoming State Hospital. Four years later, she was denied permanent total disability (PTD) benefits because maximum medical improvement had not been reached. She continued seeking medical treatment and then reapplied for PTD benefits in 2009. The Wyoming Workers’ Safety and Compensation Division (Division) denied her second claim, and the Medical Commission held a contested case hearing. Based upon the evidence presented, a panel of the Medical Commission denied the subsequent application for PTD benefits, determining that Appellant had not met her burden of proving entitlement to those benefits under the Wyoming Workers’ Compensation Act or the odd lot doctrine. It found that Appellant’s only disabling condition was psychological and not related to any compensable physical injury, and that she was thus limited to six months of benefits, which she had already received. Appellant sought review of the Medical Commission’s decision, and the district court affirmed.

Issues: The overarching question in this appeal is whether the condition causing Appellant’s disability is purely psychological, and not entirely or at least in part physical. We therefore restate the controlling issue as follows: Is the Medical Commission’s determination that Appellant was not entitled to PTD benefits because her disabling condition is solely psychological and not related to any compensable physical injury supported by substantial evidence and consistent with applicable law?

Holdings/Conclusion: The Medical Commission reasonably concluded that Appellant did not establish entitlement to PTD benefits under the Wyoming Workers’ Compensation Act or the odd lot doctrine, and its conclusions are in accordance with applicable law. 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 2013 WY 135

Summary of Decision October 24, 2013

Justice Davis delivered the opinion of the Court. Affirmed.

Case Name: IN THE MATTER OF THE WORKER’S COMPENSATION CLAIM OF: MARTY D. MCINTOSH v. STATE OF WYOMING ex rel. WYOMING WORKERS’ SAFETY and COMPENSATION DIVISION

Docket Number: S-13-0035

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

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

Representing Appellant: Margaret M. White of Karpan & White, P.C., Cheyenne, Wyoming.
per
Representing Appellee: 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: October 24, 2013

Facts: Appellant Marty D. McIntosh worked as a roustabout for Kissack Oil Field Service in Gillette, Wyoming. He sustained a second to third-degree burn to his right foot while he was steam cleaning a pumping unit. His injury was determined to be compensable and he received a 5% impairment rating. He later experienced right foot pain and difficulty standing and wearing work boots, and he therefore applied for permanent total disability (PTD) benefits. His claim was referred to a panel of the Medical Commission (“the Panel” or “the Commission”) for a contested case hearing. The Commission concluded that McIntosh did not meet his burden of proving entitlement to PTD benefits under the odd lot doctrine.

Issues: 1. Did the Commission adequately explain the rationale for its decision? 2. Does substantial evidence support the Commission’s conclusion that McIntosh did not meet his burden of proving a prima facie case of odd lot treatment? 3. Did the Commission err in finding that McIntosh’s preexisting conditions caused a significant portion of his symptoms? 4. Did the Commission err when it relied on the statements of two expert evaluators who suggested vocational rehabilitation? 5. Did the Commission act arbitrarily and capriciously because the Panel members examined McIntosh’s right foot at the contested case hearing?

Holdings/Conclusion: The Medical Commission reasonably concluded that McIntosh did not demonstrate entitlement to permanent total disability benefits under the odd lot doctrine, and its conclusions were not contrary to applicable law, arbitrary or capricious. Affirmed.

Summary 2013 WY 28

Summary of Decision March 12, 2013


Justice Davis delivered the opinion for the Court. Reversed and Remanded.

Case Name: TYLER L. STALLMAN v. STATE OF WYOMING, ex rel., WYOMING WORKERS’ SAFETY AND COMPENSATION DIVISION

Docket Number: S-12-0172

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

Appeal from the District Court of Niobrara County, Honorable Keith G. Kautz, Judge.

Representing Appellant: Brian J. Hunter of McKellar, Tiedeken & Scoggin, LLC, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee: Gregory A. Phillips, Attorney General; John D. Rossetti, Deputy Attorney General; Michael J. Finn, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Kelly Roseberry, Assistant Attorney General.

Date of Decision: March 12, 2013

Facts: Appellant Tyler L. Stallman worked for the Wyoming Department of Corrections at the Wyoming Women’s Center in Lusk, Wyoming. She sustained significant injuries during a vehicle rollover while driving to pick up a prisoner in Sheridan. After receiving a 22% permanent partial impairment award from the Wyoming Workers’ Safety and Compensation Division (the Division), she applied for permanent total disability (PTD) benefits. The Division denied her application, finding that she did not meet the statutory definition of permanent total disability. Ms. Stallman requested a contested case hearing, and the case was referred to a panel of the Medical Commission (the Commission or panel). Based upon the evidence presented, the Commission concluded that Ms. Stallman did not meet her burden of proving that she was entitled to PTD benefits under the odd lot doctrine. The district court affirmed, and Ms. Stallman appealed to this Court, claiming that the Commission’s final order was unsupported by substantial evidence and contrary to applicable law due to improper application of the odd lot doctrine

Issues: Was the Commission’s determination that Ms. Stallman was not entitled to permanent total disability benefits under the odd lot doctrine supported by substantial evidence and consistent with applicable law?

Holdings: The application of the odd lot doctrine is undoubtedly more difficult when a claimant lives in an isolated rural community where jobs are scarce. Nonetheless, our cases make it clear that once a claimant shows that she is de facto unemployable in her community due to her degree of physical impairment and other factors, the burden shifts to the Division to show that gainful employment was in fact available. The overwhelming weight of the evidence indicates that Ms. Stallman was a prima facie candidate for odd lot treatment, and that the Division failed to establish that light work she could perform was available within a reasonable distance from Lusk. There was an error of law in the application of the odd lot doctrine, and substantial evidence does not support the Commission’s conclusions. The Court accordingly reversed and remanded, directing the district court to remand to the Commission for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

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]