 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State Ex Rel. Div. v. Roggenbuck5/16/1997
Appellants Wyoming Worker's Compensation Division (Division) and Laramie County School District No. 1 (employer) appeal from an order of the Office of Administrative Hearings awarding worker's compensation benefits to Roggenbuck (claimant) for the material aggravation of a pre-existing condition.
We affirm.
The Division identifies two issues:
A. Whether the Office of Administrative Hearings' order awarding benefits for the material aggravation of a pre-existing condition is supported by substantial evidence.
B. Whether the Office of Administrative Hearings' findings of fact and order awarding benefits satisfies the specificity requirements of the Wyoming Administrative Procedure Act.
FACTS
With a history of back problems, scars from two previous back surgeries, and a permanent partial disability of 60 percent, claimant alerted his employer of a work-related injury to his back incurred nine days into his new employment. The injury resulted in a third back surgery. Employer put claimant on his proof that the work-related injury materially aggravated his pre-existing recurrent back problems by requesting a hearing. The Hearing Examiner found claimant had sustained his burden of proof. Following a timely Petition for Judicial Review, the district court certified the matter to this court. W.R.A.P. 12.09(b).
STANDARD OF REVIEW
Our standard for reviewing findings of fact made in an administrative worker's compensation hearing is well settled.
If, after examining the entire record, we find substantial evidence to support the agency's finding, we will not substitute our own judgment for that of the agency. Instead, we will uphold the agency's finding. Substantial evidence is relevant evidence which a reasonable person might accept as supporting the agency finding. In addition, we examine only the evidence which favors the prevailing party, allowing every favorable inference, while omitting consideration of any conflicting evidence.
Wyoming Steel & Fab, Inc. v. Robles, 882 P.2d 873, 876 (Wyo. 1994) (quoting Sinclair Trucking v. Bailey, 848 P.2d 1349, 1351 (Wyo. 1993)) (citations omitted). While the reviewing court may not substitute its judgment for that of the agency when reviewing findings of fact, a similar precept does not apply to agency conclusions of law. An agency's conclusions of law will be affirmed only if they are in accordance with the law. Matter of Cordova, 882 P.2d 880, 882 (Wyo. 1994); Aanenson v. State ex rel. Worker's Compensation Div., 842 P.2d 1077, 1079 (Wyo. 1992).
DISCUSSION
Substantial evidence
The burden is upon the claimant to prove that his work accident, not his pre-existing condition, caused the necessity for the surgery. Matter of Corman, 909 P.2d 966, 970 (Wyo. 1996); Matter of Claim of Fortier, 910 P.2d 1356, 1358 (Wyo. 1996). While aggravation of a pre-existing condition is a compensable injury, Matter of Injury to Carpenter, 736 P.2d 311, 312 (Wyo. 1987), claimant must prove that his employment aggravated, accelerated, or combined with the disease or infirmity to produce the disability for which compensation is sought. Romero v. Davy McKee Corp., 854 P.2d 59, 61 (Wyo. 1993); Lindbloom v. Teton Int'l, 684 P.2d 1388, 1390 (Wyo. 1984).
The record discloses that the hearing examiner took note of the claimant's pre-existing condition. Medical evidence included a statement by the doctor treating claimant since January of 1991 that 50 percent of claimant's current condition was due to the instant injury. This percentage included the normal aging process and normal daily living acti
Page 1 2 3 Wyoming Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|