Skip to content
Ott Law Firm

Stephen Craig v. Bentley Trucking, Inc.

Decision date: August 4, 200613 pages

Summary

The Commission modified the Administrative Law Judge's award by reversing the determination that the employee failed to prove the need for future medical treatment. The Commission awarded the employee future medical care and treatment for burn injuries to his bilateral upper extremities, finding competent medical testimony supported the reasonably probable need for ongoing pain management, neoprene support, and monitoring for potential scar cancer.

Archive Notice

This archive contains published Missouri Labor and Industrial Relations Commission workers' compensation decisions reproduced for research convenience. Official source links remain authoritative where provided. Joseph Ott, Attorney 67889, Ott Law Firm - Constant Victory - Personal Injury and Litigation maintains these public legal archives to support Missouri case research and to help prospective clients connect that research to the firm's courtroom practice.

Related Legal Help

Practical guidance for this decision

Third-Party Injury Check

This workers' comp decision may point to a separate injury claim.

  • A driver, contractor, property owner, or equipment company may share fault.
  • The injury involved a vehicle, unsafe premises, defective equipment, or a non-employer vendor.
  • A serious injury or death may need both benefits review and civil-claim analysis.

Caption

Issued by THE LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION
FINAL AWARD ALLOWING COMPENSATION (Modifying Award and Decision of Administrative Law Judge)
Injury No.: 01-127626
Employee:Stephen Craig
Employer:Bentley Trucking, Inc.
Insurer:Wausau Insurance Company
Additional Party:Treasurer of Missouri as Custodian of Second Injury Fund (Open)
Date of Accident:October 26, 2001
Place and County of Accident:Jackson County, Missouri
The above-entitled workers' compensation case is submitted to the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) for review as provided bysection 287.480 RSMo. Pursuant to section 286.090 RSMo, subsequent to reviewing the evidence and considering the entire record, the Commission modifies the award and decision of the administrative law judge dated November 14, 2005.
The Commission affirms all findings and conclusions of law made by the administrative law judge, but for the determination concerning the issue of future medical care and treatment. Theadministrative law judge concluded that the employee failed to meet his burden to prove the need for future medical treatment. The Commission disagrees with that determination, and does award the employee future medical care and treatment to cure and relieve the employee from the effects of his burn injuries to his bilateral upper extremities.
In summary fashion, employee testified that he continues to suffer swelling in his bi-lateral upper extremities with associated pain, weakness and limitation of motion. He is still treating with Dr. Irby, who provides him with prescription medications for pain. The principal medical opinions concerning the issue of future medical care and treatment were rendered by the selected authorized treating specialist, Dr. Korentager, and the rating physician utilized by employee, Dr. Parmet.
Prior to releasing employee from care, Dr. Korentager opined on January 12, 2004, that employee would benefit from continuing to use a neoprene elbow support. Dr. Korentager was also of the medical opinion that employee be monitored and or sent for medical pain management.
Dr. Parmet opined that there was a slight risk over employee’s lifetime of developing a scar cancer in his burn sites, and employee should be medically observed for development of any such lesions. Additionally, Dr. Parmet was of the opinion that employee would benefit from pain management. In the words of Dr. Parmet, “he should be afforded additional therapy for pain management. My initial recommendation would be for the use of neuropathic pain medication, such as gabapentin or amitriptyline”.
The Commission can find little if any medical opinions contra to the opinions of Dr. Korentager and Dr. Parmet.
The need for future medical care need not be established as a certainty, but it must be established as being reasonably probable through competent, medical testimony. Bowers v. Highland Dairy Company, 132 S.W.3d 260 (Mo. App. 2004).
The Commission concludes that the competent and substantial evidence supports a finding that employee is entitled to receive future medical care and treatment reasonable and necessary to cure and relieve him from the effects of his burn injuries to his bilateral upper extremities, and this benefit is awarded. As mentioned above, all remaining findings of fact and conclusions of law are affirmed.

The award and decision of Administrative Law Judge Rebecca S. Magruder issued November 14, 2005, as modified, is attached and incorporated by this reference.

This Award is subject to a lien in favor of the Department of Social Services, Division of Child Support Enforcement.

The Commission further approves and affirms the administrative law judge's allowance of attorney's fee herein as being fair and reasonable.

Any past due compensation shall bear interest as provided by law.

Given at Jefferson City, State of Missouri, this $4^{\text {th }}$ day of August 2006.

LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION

William F. Ringer, Chairman

Alice A. Bartlett, Member

Attest:

John J. Hickey, Member

Secretary

AWARD AS TO EMPLOYER/INSURER ONLY

Employee: Stephen Craig

Injury No. 01-127626

Employer: Bentley Trucking, Inc.

Insurer: Wausau Insurance Co.

Additional Party: Missouri State Treasurer as Custodian of the Second Injury Fund

Hearing Date: August 25, 2005

Briefs Filed: October 7 and 17, 2005

Checked by: RSM/abj

FINDINGS OF FACT AND RULINGS OF LAW

  1. Are any benefits awarded herein? Yes.
  2. Was the injury or occupational disease compensable under Chapter 287? Yes.
  3. Was there an accident or incident of occupational disease under the law? Yes.
  4. Date of accident or onset of occupational disease: October 26, 2001.
  5. State location where accident occurred or occupational disease was contracted: Jackson County, Missouri.
  1. Was above employee in employ of above employer at time of alleged accident or occupational disease? Yes.
  2. Did employer receive proper notice? Yes.
  3. Did accident or occupational disease arise out of and in the course of the employment? Yes.
  4. Was claim for compensation filed within time required by law? Yes.
  5. Was employer insured by above insurer? Yes.
  6. Describe work employee was doing and how accident occurred or occupational disease contracted: While transferring hot asphalt oil in the course of his employment, a hose disconnected causing the hot oil to spray onto the employee.
  7. Did accident or occupational disease cause death? No. Date of death? N/A
  8. Part(s) of body injured by accident or occupational disease: Both upper extremities and right leg.
  9. Nature and extent of any permanent disability: 21.2 % body as a whole plus 18 weeks disfigurement
  10. Compensation paid to date for temporary disability: $\ 22,400.71
  11. Value necessary medical aid paid to date by employer/insurer? $\ 52,345.00
  12. Value necessary medical aid not furnished by employer/insurer? $\ 467.03
  13. Employee's average weekly wages: $\ 877.66
  14. Weekly compensation rate: $\$ 591.71 / \ 329.42
  15. Method wages computation: By agreement.

COMPENSATION PAYABLE

  1. Amount of compensation payable:

.. Unpaid medical expenses ..... $\ 467.03

.. 68 weeks of temporary total disability at $\ 591.71 per week ..... $\ 40,236.28

Employer has paid $\ 22,400.71 to date and is entitled to a credit

Against the ttd award in that amount. ..... $<22,400.71>

847 / 8 weeks of permanent partial disability to be paid at \ 329.42 per week. ..... $\ 27,928.22

.. 18 weeks of disfigurement to be paid at $\ 329.42 per week ..... $\ 5,929.56

TOTAL. ..... $\ 52,160.38

  1. Second Injury Fund liability: To be determined later by separate stipulation and award.
  2. Future requirements awarded: None.

Said payments to begin as of the date of this Award and to be payable and subject to modification and review as provided by law.

Employee:Stephen CraigInjury No. 01-127626
Employer:Bentley Trucking, Inc.
Insurer:Wausau Insurance Co.
Additional Party:Missouri State Treasurer as Custodian of the Second Injury Fund
Hearing Date:August 25, 2005
Briefs Filed:October 7 and 17, 2005Checked by:

STIPULATIONS

At the hearing, the parties stipulated that:

  1. On or about October 26, 2001, Bentley Trucking, Inc., was an employer operating under the provisions of the Missouri workers' compensation law and that their liability under said law was fully insured by Wausau Insurance Company;
  2. on or about October 26, 2001, Steven Craig was an employee of Bentley Trucking, Inc., and was working under the provisions of the Missouri workers' compensation law;
  3. on or about October 26, 2001, Steven Craig sustained an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment;
  4. the employer had notice of the injury and that a Claim for Compensation was filed within the time prescribed by law;
  5. the average weekly wage was $\ 877.66 and that the applicable compensation rate is $\ 591.71 per week for temporary total disability benefits and $\ 329.42 per week for permanent partial disability benefits;
  6. compensation has been paid in the total amount of $\ 22,400.71;
  7. the temporary total disability benefits which were paid were paid from commencing October 26, 2001, through January 9, 2002; commencing again on August 23, 2002, through November 14, 2002; and finally, from September 29, 2003, through January 12, 2004; and
  8. medical aid had been furnished in the amount of $\ 52,345.00.

ISSUES

The issues to be determined by this hearing are as follows:

  1. The nature and extent of any permanent disability resulting from the October 26, 2001, accident;
  2. whether the employer should be required to pay the claimant $\ 467.03 for medical bills he has incurred and paid up to today's date;
  3. whether the employer is obligated to provide additional temporary total disability benefits to the claimant;
  1. whether the employer should provide any future medical benefits to the claimant; and
  2. whether there has been an overpayment of temporary total disability benefits by the employer.

EVIDENCE

The evidence in the case consisted of numerous medical records and reports as well as the deposition testimony of Dr. Korentager and deposition testimony of several lay witnesses.

FINDINGS AND RULINGS

The claimant in this case, Steven Craig, was employed by Bentley Trucking, Inc., and during the course and scope of his employment on or about October 26, 2001, he suffered serious injuries to both of his upper extremities. He was transferring hot asphalt oil from his work truck to a job site when a hose coupling suddenly and unexpectedly disconnected causing the hot asphalt oil to spray directly onto Claimant's right and left arms and hands. The whole front of the claimant's body was sprayed except his face; however, it was a cool day and the claimant was wearing jeans, shoes, a jacket, and gloves on his hands. The oil blew up the sleeves of his jacket, burning him severely on the right and left forearms. The claimant initially drove himself to the emergency room at Jamesport and later to Chillicothe. He does not recall much after that because of the medications that were administered for his pain. He was transferred to the University of Kansas Medical Center but has no memory of that transfer. He was hospitalized for several days and underwent multiple grafts with a donor site on his right anterior thigh.

The employer and insurer do not dispute the compensability of this accident. They initially provided medical care and temporary total disability benefits for the claimant's injuries to his upper extremities. After being released back to light duty work in January 2002, the claimant did in fact return to work for Bentley. He continued to have difficulties with his upper extremities and filed a separate Claim for Compensation alleging additional upper extremity injury due to repetitive work activities. This is Injury No. 02-061372 alleging injury due to occupational disease on February 4, 2002 (see Award Denying Compensation on Injury No. 02-061372). Claimant quit working at Bentley in February of 2002.

He testified that he was experiencing pain in both of his forearms that would shoot up to his shoulders and down into his hands. In the spring of 2002 left cubital tunnel was diagnosed and on August 23, 2002 Dr. Korentager performed a left ulnar release and transposition at the elbow. At that time, August 23, 2002, the employer commenced paying temporary total disability benefits again and did so through November 14, 2002.

In December of 02 the claimant was undergoing therapy and Dr. Korentager at that time was considering treatment at a pain center. In February of 2003 Dr. Korentager recommended a pain management clinic. On May 13, 2003, the claimant was seen by Lynn Ketchum, M.D., as a hand specialty referral. Dr. Ketchum recommended neurolysis of the left ulnar nerve

Full decision text continues in the plain-text archive copy.

Related Decisions

Nash v. Ardagh Glass, Inc.(2021)

June 15, 2021#15-103744

affirmed

The Commission affirmed the Administrative Law Judge's decision denying workers' compensation benefits to employee Donald Nash for an alleged burn to his left foot and big toe that occurred on November 23, 2015. The decision found that the alleged injury did not arise out of and in the course of employment, making it non-compensable under Missouri workers' compensation law.

burn4,667 words

The Labor and Industrial Relations Commission affirmed the administrative law judge's award allowing workers' compensation for Landon Sterling's welding burn injury to his right elbow sustained on May 12, 2011. The award includes permanent partial disability compensation of 15% at the 210-week level, temporary total disability for 4 weeks, and disfigurement benefits, with the employer's insurer liable for all awarded compensation.

burn4,324 words

The Commission affirmed the administrative law judge's decision awarding no workers' compensation benefits to Mike Crigger. The injury was found not to have arisen out of and in the course of employment because the employee was using a cutting torch on his personal vehicle when a fire started, rather than performing work for his employer.

burn3,423 words

The Commission affirmed the administrative law judge's award of workers' compensation benefits for Benjamin Marcak's work-related burn injury to his right leg sustained on January 18, 2006. The award includes 10% permanent partial disability (155 week level) and unpaid medical expenses of $26,289.70, with no temporary disability compensation awarded.

burn5,427 words

The Commission affirmed the administrative law judge's award of workers' compensation to Christopher King for a burn injury to his right ankle/foot caused by hot grease splashing during cooking on November 30, 2004. The employee was awarded $870.64 in compensation for 5% permanent partial disability of the right ankle.

burn2,496 words