Ottwell (Parrish) v Treasurer of Mo.
Release Date: 11/2/2021
Venue: ED 109447
Summary: Claimant appeals PPD award and asserts PTD against the Fund and asserts the Commission improperly excluded her vocational report. The court remanded to consider the excluded report.
Discussion: Claimant reported CTS to Chrysler and then accepted a retirement package when the plant closed. She underwent surgery a month before her retirement in 2009. In 2010 she settled with her employer and then filed an amended claim against the Fund seeking PTD on the basis of pre-existing bladder and psychiatric issues. The ALJ [Denigan] excluded the vocational report on the finding that it relied upon an inadmissible hearsay medical exam from Dr. Shuter, who was deceased and portions of Dr. Volarich's report which relied upon Lalk who relied upon Shuter and considered PTD evidence was "unverified." The Commission found claimant failed to prove the prior psychaitric conditon was disabling.
The Court found the commission abused its discretion to exclude the report, that an expert could rely upon hearsay evidence if it is reasonably relied upon and not merely a conduit for another expert's opinions. The Court finds minimal references to the report, that the SIF attorney used an overbroad definition of relied upon, and that information in the "objectionable" report was present in other sources.
Hon Odenwald notes: "Given the record before us, we are persuaded that the Commission’s ruling to exclude Lalk’s testimony in its entirety was clearly against the logic of the circumstances and displayed a lack of careful, deliberate consideration."
Parties
Mogab, atty
Dresher, atty
OtwellPatricia09-01561012-30-20.pdf (mo.gov) (Commisson case)
