 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Highman v. Labor & Industry Review Commission11/14/2000
APPEAL from a judgment of the circuit court for Dunn County: RODERICK A. CAMERON, Judge.
Affirmed.
. Stephen J. Highman appeals from a judgment affirming a Labor and Industry Review Commission (LIRC) decision dismissing his claim for duty disability benefits under Wis. Stat. § 40.65(4). At issue is whether Highman's non-traumatic mental injury resulted from stress of a greater dimension than that ordinarily experienced by police officers. Because LIRC reasonably concluded that Highman's injury was not compensable, we affirm the judgment.
. Highman was a deputy at the Dunn County Sheriff's Department for approximately seven years until October 22, 1992, when he took himself off duty for psychological reasons. Highman remained on medical leave for over a year and was ultimately terminated. He filed a claim for duty disability benefits under Wis. Stat. § 40.65(4), which allows a person employed in a protective occupation to receive disability benefits if the employee sustains injuries while performing his or her duty, if the disability is likely to be permanent, and if the disability causes the employee to retire from his or her job.
. Highman's claim was denied after several hearings before an administrative law judge (ALJ), and he appealed to LIRC. LIRC affirmed the ALJ's findings and order denying benefits. The circuit court affirmed LIRC's decision and this appeal ensued.
. The parties do not dispute that Highman suffered a mental injury and that the cause of the injury was arguably due entirely to workplace stress. The sole issue presented is whether Highman's injury "resulted from a situation of greater dimensions than the day-to-day emotional strain and tension which all employees must experience." See School Dist. #1 v. DILHR, 62 Wis. 2d 370, 377-78, 215 N.W.2d 373 (1974). This standard for evaluating non-traumatic mental injuries was established in School Dist. #1, a workers' compensation case, and subsequently has been applied to duty disability cases. See Village of Random Lake v. LIRC, 141 Wis. 2d 559, 565-66, 415 N.W.2d 577 (Ct. App. 1987). Pursuant to the standard established in School Dist. #1, Highman cannot recover duty disability benefits unless he experienced stress of a greater dimension than that ordinarily experienced by police officers.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
. On appeal, we review LIRC's, not the circuit court's, decision. See Stafford Trucking, Inc. v. DILHR, 102 Wis. 2d 256, 260, 306 N.W.2d 79 (Ct. App. 1981). Whether the stress Highman suffered as a police officer was extraordinary is a mixed question of fact and law. See Bretl v. LIRC, 204 Wis. 2d 93, 100, 553 N.W.2d 550 (Ct. App. 1996). The determination of the parties' conduct is an issue of fact, and LIRC's factual findings must be upheld if there is any credible and substantial evidence in the record upon which a reasonable person could rely to make the same findings. See Wis. Stat. § 102.23(6); Bretl, 204 Wis. 2d at 100.
. LIRC's interpretation and application of the non-traumatic mental injury standard established in School Dist. #1 presents a question of law. See Bretl, 204 Wis. 2d at 100. When reviewing legal conclusions drawn by LIRC, we apply a sliding scale of deference that is contingent upon the level of LIRC's expertise, technical competence and specialized knowledge. See id. at 104. The great weight standard is the highest degree of deference granted an administrative agency's conclusion of law or statutory interpretation; it is used when the agency's experience, technical competence and specialized knowledge assist the agency in its interpretation and application of the statute. See Ide v. LIRC, 224 Wis. 2d 159, 166,
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Wisconsin Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|