 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Murray v. State ex rel. Wyoming Workers' Safety and Compensation Division12/29/1999
W.R.A.P. 12.09(b) Certification from the District Court of Uinta County Honorable John D. Troughton, Judge
Appellant Donald Murray=s wrists broke out in hives shortly after he drew a sample of raw gas as part of his job activities. When the Workers= Compensation Division denied Murray's claim for benefits, a contested case hearing was held to determine whether his injury was work-related. The hearing examiner held that Murray=s inability to identify the precise chemical which caused his skin problem constituted failure to prove a compensable injury as a matter of law. We find that Murray=s inability to identify the specific source of his rash does not preclude a finding of causation as a matter of law, and therefore, reverse and remand.
ISSUES
Appellant Murray phrases the issues as follows:
A. Did the Hearing Examiner err in applying the burden of proof for occupational disease/injuries which occur over a substantial period of time, ' 27-14-603 W.S.A. (1997 Ed), to Appellant=s case[?]
B. Did the hearing examiner impose a greater burden of proof than a preponderance of the evidence, (sic) in requiring the Appellant to identify a specific chemical causing injury[?]
C. Was the Hearing Examiner=s decision that Appellant had not met his burden of proof on causation an abuse of discretion[?]
Appellee Wyoming Workers= Compensation Division phrases the issues as:
The Hearing Examiner denied benefits for the Employee=s skin disease for several alternative reasons.
A. Was any one of the Hearing Examiner=s alternative reasons supported by substantial evidence, within his discretion and in accordance with law?
FACTS
In 1982, Murray began work as a plant operator at the Chevron USA, Inc. Carter Creek Gas Plant. His position required daily contact with a number of chemicals including raw gas, raw sulfur, treated gas, and gas stream products. Toward the end of his shift, on the morning of March 6, 1997, Murray drew a routine sample of raw gas. Approximately 15 to 20 minutes later, he suffered an outbreak of severe urticaria (hives) on his wrists appearing at the point where his gloves had been rolled down.
Later that day, Murray went to the emergency room when the urticaria became more severe and had spread over his entire body. There, he saw Dr. French, who speculated that the cause of the rash could have been a reaction to the medication he had recently taken for a sinus condition. As his condition persisted, Murray consulted several other medical practitioners to determine the cause and treatment for his condition. He eventually saw Dr. John Zone, a board certified dermatologist and immunologist, who conducted tests which returned negative for allergies to latex, food, and the medication which Murray was taking prior to his outbreak.
While under the care of Dr. Zone, Murray had another severe outbreak while handling Glad garbage bags. After he reported this event to Dr. Zone, the doctor performed a Ascratch test@ with Glad bags which caused a life-threatening reaction. Dr. Zone then surmised that Murray was allergic to petroleum products because the bags are coated with various substances including hydrocarbons.
Murray filed a claim for benefits with the Division, and two days later, the Division issued a final determination denying benefits because the employee had not suffered an injury as defined by the Workers= Compensation Act. A hearing to determine Murray=s claim was held on October 22, 1998. The parties agreed that the issue was whether the injury was work- related, but differed as to whether Murray was required to prove the
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Wyoming Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|