Claimant fails to prove back injury resulted in need for surgery

 Neitzert v New Bloomfield

Release Date Oct 30 2024

Venue:  Callaway County

The Commission 2-1 affirms an award of 15% BAW for a back strain while trying to move a drill press and found claimant's need for surgery flowed from subsequent degenerative conditions and not from the work injury based on the expert opinion of Dr. Chabot.    A dissent asserted because claimant denied priors, that all benefits including PTD flowed from her admitted back strain and escalated years later into a need for surgery.

 ALJ Farmer

Commission flips denial of future medical on arthritic knee

 Terry Tedder v City of St. Louis 

20-060957

Claimant injured his knee and proved a need for total knee replacement for his arthritic knee, reversing the finding of  the ALJ who awarded 35% of the knee but denied future medical. 

Dr. Volarich indicated claimant would "likely" require a total knee in the futrure.  

Dr. Hawk indicated that claimant's work related meniscectomy made it more likely for him to require a total knee. 

Dr. Krause concluded any need for total knee flowed from prior OA, and that any contribution from work was "slight."

The Commission found the need for future treatent flowed from the work accident, even if the work accident contributed marginally to the need for care, and that Dr. Krause may have used a reversible  prevailing factor standard.   

The ALJ noted the effects of the knee were "unusally" severe with constant fear of the knee giving out. The ALJ noted claimant had unique credibility as the treating physician who observed the knee at the time of surgery to concude much of claimant's problem was degenerative. A dissent would have affirmed the denial of future medical. 

  

Commission affirms repetitive trauma award for arthritic employee.

 Sherry Neighbors v. The Salvation Army

21-029047  D/A 2-11-2021

The Commission affirms a PPD award 2-1 of more than $70,000 for a 60 year old former employee with arthritis who claims repeittive trauma disorder to both shoulders and both feet based on testimony of 'unrelenting' work for 15 years standing on concrete 40 hours a week, lifting items, and putting clothes on racks and using vibrating equipment.  A dissent felt she exaggerated her job duties.  

She claims she quit when she could no longer lift her arms.  The ALJ admitted non-peer reviewed magazines and noted a "negative interaction" between the expert and the doctor.  The ALJ found the events compensable whether they caused arthritis or aggravated it.  

ALJ Fowler

Atty: McKay, Smith

Experts:  Charapata, Frevert, Lingenfelter, Hallaron

Commission stacks prior CLSS to reach SIF threshold

 Brian White v Missouri American Water

20-018403    dec. 10-1-2024

The Fund appealed a PTD award against it on a primary 12.5% settlement and in which the ALJ allowed some of claimant's 10 prior settlements to combine to reach threshold levels.  

Claimant is 58 years old and treated essentially for a chest strain which the treating doctor felt represented 5% new disablity imposed on prior conditions.  Claimant relied upon opinions of Dr. Volarich and Gonzalez who found claimant total combo with prior back and  shoulder conditions.    

The Commisision rejected the Fund argument that an occupational disease was not a qualifying condition and found multiple successive conditions to the same body part (back) could combine.  

Atty:  Gregory, Kincaide

ALJ Keaveny 

Experts, Volarich,  Gonzalez

Commission denies PTD against fund on issue whether priors qualify

 Jeremy Jarvis v Monsanto 

Inj. No. 15-098439  

decision:  Oct 3, 2024 

The Commission affirms a denial of SIF benefits on a failure to prove a prior arm condition was a qualifying prior disablity.  The second injury fund indicated claimant was bound by a prior settlement amount, and the Commission concluded that a prior settlement amount was relevant but not controlling like a binding judgment.    

A dissent found that other qualifying disability supported an award regardless of the history of a fracture adn noted vocational opinon that claimant's movements would make him appear disabled to a potential employer.  

The ALJ noted two separate issues whether claimant was totally disabled and whether the Fund had liability and that the conclusion, although listed in alternate scenarios, included nonqualifying disaiblity. The vocational expert indicated the right leg alone might render claimant totally disabled due to a need to accomodate pain control.  

The 45 year old ironworker sought PTD benefits against the SIF after settling with the employer and relied upon two prior cases, one in which the fund had paid benefits.  The ALJ found a leg injury at 2011 by itself did not meet the minimum threshold but become more disabling due to a subsequent teatment.    The ALJ, however, found claimant's prior left wrist injury did not make threshold and that Dr. Volarich's efforts to make the PPD a bigger number were not persuasive.  

The ALJ left unresolved whether a loading factor paid by the employer  could be considered.  

   

ALJ  Boresi

Atty:  Knepper,  Campbell

Experts:  Volarich, Lalk