 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Robertson v. North Dakota Workers Compensation Bureau9/5/2000
nly who are normal. Those who are below normal, have a weakness, or carry perchance a disease, are also within its protection. Compensation is not dependent upon any implied assumption of perfect health. It does not exclude the weak or physically unfortunate.
[ ] Under our law enforcement presumption, " worker's employment need not be the sole cause of the disease," and "just because personal habits make a worker more prone to certain injuries does not mean the Bureau can deny a claim when the evidence indicates with reasonable medical certainty that work conditions are causally connected to the particular injury." McDaniel, 1997 ND 154, 12, 567 N.W.2d 833. We agree the Legislature's enactment of the law enforcement presumption represents a legislatively adopted premise that work stress of law enforcement officers affects risk factors and causes heart disease. Other courts have recognized that expert medical opinion rejecting the legislatively adopted premise of the presumption is insufficient to rebut the presumption. See Stephens, 97 Cal. Rptr. at 716; Linnell, 305 N.W.2d at 601; Sperbeck, 174 N.W.2d at 549. We agree the effect of the presumption would be defeated if it could be rebutted by expert medical opinion generally denying the validity of the legislatively enacted premise that work stress causes heart problems. We conclude expert medical opinion that denies the underlying premise of a causal relationship between a law enforcement officer's work stress, including the claimant's predisposition to risk factors, and heart disease is insufficient to rebut the presumption the heart disease was suffered in the line of duty.
[ ] Here, the Bureau's decision was based primarily on Dr. Berman's opinion. Dr. Berman testified he did not believe stress was an important risk factor for heart disease, and his testimony essentially rejected the legislatively adopted premise that a law enforcement officer's work stress causes heart disease. Moreover, two of the risk factors relied upon by Dr. Berman were elevated cholesterol and hypertension. The Bureau initially adopted the ALJ's recommended findings that Robertson's high cholesterol was diagnosed as early as 1988 and his high blood pressure was diagnosed as early as June 1989. Under those findings, medical documentation of those risk factors occurred after Robertson began working in law enforcement in March 1982. Any reliance on a risk factor manifesting itself after Robertson began working in law enforcement is misplaced. Dr. Kilzer and Dr. Oatfield also opined that Robertson would have developed the problem regardless of his employment, and those expert opinions were essentially based on the same premise that risk factors caused the heart condition. We conclude the Bureau's expert medical opinions were legally insufficient to rebut the law enforcement presumption. We hold the Bureau did not meet its burden of rebutting the presumption that Robertson's heart disease was suffered in the line of duty.
VII.
[ ] We reverse and remand with directions to award Robertson appropriate benefits.
[ ] The Honorable Gerald G. Glaser, S.J., sitting in place of Kapsner, J., disqualified.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 North Dakota Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|