Skip to content
Ott Law Firm

Linda Bryant v. HealthSouth

Decision date: February 25, 201029 pages

Summary

The Commission affirmed the Administrative Law Judge's decision denying workers' compensation benefits to Linda Bryant for degenerative cervical disease, finding that her work position was not a substantial factor in causing her condition. The court determined that degenerative cervical disease is an ordinary disease of life to which the general public is exposed, not a compensable occupational disease arising from her employment with HealthSouth.

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

FINAL AWARD DENYING COMPENSATION (Affirming Award and Decision of Administrative Law Judge by Supplemental Opinion)
Injury No.: 01-103025
Employee:Linda Bryant
Employer:HealthSouth
Insurer:Pacific Employers Insurance Company
Additional Party:Treasurer of Missouri as Custodian of Second Injury Fund
The above-entitled workers' compensation case is submitted to the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) for review as provided by § 287.480 RSMo. Having reviewed the evidence, read the briefs, and considered the whole record, the Commission finds that the award of the administrative law judge is supported by competent and substantial evidence and was made in accordance with the Missouri Workers’ Compensation Law. Pursuant to § 286.090 RSMo, the Commission affirms the award and decision of the administrative law judge dated July 8, 2009, as supplemented herein.The findings of fact and stipulations of the parties were accurately recounted in the award of the administrative law judge and are adopted by the Commission.The administrative law judge found that neither employee’s work position nor her activity with employer was a substantial factor in causing the onset of symptoms she experienced in June 2001, the need for the medical treatment she received after that date, or any disability. The administrative law judge further found that employee’s degenerative cervical disease is not an occupational disease because it did not have its origin in a risk connected with the employment and was an ordinary disease of life to which the general public is exposed outside the employment. Thus, the administrative law judge concluded, employee failed to meet her burden of proving that her work position or activity with employer was a substantial factor in causing a compensable injury, and compensation must be denied.Although the administrative law judge went into great detail in explaining her rationale for concluding that the opinions of Dr. Wagner and Dr. Coyle were more credible than those of Dr. Cohen or Dr. Hoffman, she did not use the proper analysis in determining whether employee should prevail on a theory of occupational disease.As correctly stated in the award by the administrative law judge, this claim concerns an alleged occupational disease occurring before the 2005 statutory amendments; therefore, the 2000 version of § 287.067 applies. Section 287.067.1 RSMo (2000) defines occupational disease as follows: [A]n identifiable disease arising with or without human fault out of and in the course of the employment. Ordinary diseases of life to which the

- 2 -

General public is exposed outside of the employment shall not be compensable, except where the diseases follow as an incident of an occupational disease as defined in this section. The disease need not to have been foreseen or expected but after its contraction it must appear to have had its origin in a risk connected with the employment and to have flowed from that source as a rational consequence.

Section 287.067.2 RSMo (2000)

The administrative law judge correctly listed the aforementioned definition, but she did not correctly include what a claimant must prove to prevail on a theory of occupational disease. In examining occupational diseases, the courts have made clear that the claimant must prove by substantial and competent evidence that:

  1. She has contracted an occupational disease and not an ordinary disease of life by showing that:

- a. her work creates exposure to the disease greater than or different from that which affects the public generally; and

- b. there is a recognizable link between the disease and a feature of jobs of claimant's job type.

  1. A probability that the occupational disease was caused by conditions in the workplace.

See *Smitth v. Climate Engineering*, 939 S.W.2d 429, 433 (Mo. App. 1996).

In this case, Dr. Wagner opined that the onset of symptoms experienced by employees in June 2001, and the cervical surgery she underwent in December 2001, were the result of degenerative cervical disease, and that nothing employee did, while working for employer, aggravated this disease, caused the onset of symptoms she experienced in June 2001, or hastened the need for her cervical fusion.

Further, Dr. Coyle testified that he believes that the medical treatment for the cervical spine that employee received on or after July 1, 2001, was necessitated by a progressive deteriorating degenerative condition and not due to any incident or work activity at either employee's previous job, or with employer.

Dr. Cohen opined that employee sustained an overuse disorder of the cervical spine and chronic pain syndrome, which resulted in permanent neck disability, work limitations, and the need for medical treatment, due to her injury on or about June 27, 2001, and her work with employer. Dr. Cohen attributed no medical treatment, disability, or work limitations to employee's previous job.

Finally, Dr. Hoffman included in a letter dated August 12, 2002, that it was his opinion that employee had "aggravation of pre-existing problems with her occupation both at [her previous job and with employer]."

The most persuasive fact in determining whether Dr. Wagner and Dr. Coyle's opinions should be found more credible than Dr. Cohen and Dr. Hoffman's is that the history employee gave Dr. Cohen and Dr. Hoffman is directly contradicted by employee's medical records.

Employee told Dr. Cohen that after she experienced a burning feeling in her neck for about five minutes after lifting a patient at her previous job on April 1, 2000, and that she had no symptoms at all in her neck until June 27, 2001. Employee also told Dr. Cohen that she previously had some neck discomfort from doing typing work, but the pain was not significant and resolved after she went home and applied lcy Hot. Employee also told Dr. Cohen that the only medical treatment she received for neck discomfort before June 27, 2001, was the lcy Hot she applied at home.

Likewise, employee told Dr. Hoffman that before the June 2001, onset of symptoms, she had experienced some problems off and on for years, but the symptoms would subside within a day or so. Dr. Hoffman performed surgery on employee and provided his August 12, 2002, opinion letter without ever having seen any of employee's MRIs.

As the administrative law judge stated, employee's medical records show that for at least four years before June 27, 2001, employee had bouts of pain that were severe enough and lasted long enough for her to seek medical evaluation, chiropractic treatment, physical therapy, and prescription medication as late as July 2000, when she was given a prescription for Flexeril (with three refills).

Dr. Cohen testified that employee's history was critical, and that he would determine causation from the history given to him by the patient.

On the other hand, Dr. Wagner and Dr. Coyle had employee's pre-2001 treatment records, which showed the history of medical treatment and evaluations for neck pain. In addition, when employee saw Dr. Coyle on February 16, 2005, she admitted that she had had flare-ups of neck pain over the years for a long period of time, but that the symptoms would go away for a spell and then would hurt again. Dr. Coyle also took notice that employee testified that her intermittent bouts of neck pain were not precipitated by work activities.

Drs. Wagner and Coyle had the benefit of employee's pre-2001 medical records in determining that employee's condition is more accurately diagnosed as degenerative cervical disease and not an occupational disease, whereas Drs. Cohen and Hoffman based their opinions off of the inaccurate self-serving history given to them by employee.

For the foregoing reasons, we find, as did the administrative law judge, that the opinions of Drs. Wagner and Coyle are more credible than the opinions of Drs. Cohen and

Hoffman. Therefore, we find that even if it is somehow found that employee proved by substantial and competent evidence that her work created an exposure to her cervical disease greater than or different from that which affects the public generally; and that there is a recognizable link between her cervical disease and her job with employer, she still does not prevail on a theory of occupational disease because she failed to prove a probability that her cervical problems were caused by conditions in her workplace. The overwhelming weight of the evidence suggests that employee suffers from degenerative cervical disease that began far before her employment with employer and that it is this degenerative disease that is the cause of her cervical problems, not her work employer.

As stated above, the Commission agrees with the conclusions reached by the administrative law judge and affirms with supplementation as provided herein. Thus, employee's claim for past medical expenses, future medical treatment, temporary total disability benefits, and permanent total or partial disability benefits, is denied.

The award and decision of Administrative Law Judge Vicky Ruth, issued July 8, 2009, is affirmed, and is attached and incorporated by this reference.

Given at Jefferson City, State of Missouri, this $25^{\text {th }}$ day of February 2010.

LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION

NOT SITTING

William F. Ringer, Chairman

Alice A. Bartlett, Member

John J. Hickey, Member

Attest:

Secretary

AWARD

Employee:Linda BryantInjury No. 01-103025
Dependents:N/ABefore the
Employer:HealthSouthDIVISION OF WORKERS'
Additional Party: Second Injury FundCOMPENSATION
Insurer:Pacific Employers Insurance CompanyDepartment of Labor and Industrial
Hearing Date:
April 8, 2009

FINDINGS OF FACT AND RULINGS OF LAW

  1. Are any benefits awarded herein? No.
  2. Was the injury or occupational disease compensable under Chapter 287? No.
  3. Was there an accident or incident of occupational disease under the Law? No.
  4. Date of accident or onset of occupational disease: Alleged June 27, 2001.
  5. State location where accident occurred or occupational disease was contracted: Franklin County, Missouri.
  6. Was above employee in employ of above employer at time of alleged accident or occupational disease? Yes.
  7. Did employer receive proper notice? Yes.
  8. Did accident or occupational disease arise out of and in the course of the employment? N/A.
  9. Was claim for compensation filed within time required by Law? Yes.
  10. Was employer insured by above insurer? Yes.
  11. Describe work employee was doing and how accident occurred or occupational disease contracted: The claimant worked in a data-entry position, where she performed typing tasks, used the telephone and an adding machine, and completed paperwork.
  12. Did accident or occupational disease cause death? No. Date of death? N/A.
  13. $\operatorname{Part}(\mathrm{s})$ of body injured by accident or occupational disease: Alleged body as a whole, referable to neck and low back; both wrists; both arms.
  14. Nature and extent of any permanent disability: None/see award.
  15. Compensation paid to-date for temporary disability: None.
  16. Value necessary medical aid paid to date by employer/insurer? None.
  17. Value necessary medical aid not furnished by employer/insurer? None.

Employee: Linda Bryant

  1. Employee's average weekly wages: $\ 480.00.
  2. Weekly compensation rate: $\ 320.00 PTD; $\ 314.26 PPD.
  3. Method wages computation: By agreement.

COMPENSATION PAYABLE

  1. Amount of compensation payable from Employer: None.
  2. Second Injury Fund liability: None.
  3. Future Requirements Awarded: None.

FINDINGS OF FACT and RULINGS OF LAW:

Employee: Linda Bryant

Injury No: 01-103025

Dependents: N/A

Employer: HealthSouth

Additional Party: Second Injury Fund

Insurer: Pacific Employers Insurance Company

Before the <br> DIVISION OF WORKERS' <br> COMPENSATION <br> Department of Labor and Industrial <br> Relations of Missouri <br> Jefferson City, Missouri

On April 8, 2009, the claimant, the employer/insurer, and the Second Injury Fund appeared for a final a

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

Related Decisions

affirmed

The Labor and Industrial Relations Commission affirmed the Administrative Law Judge's award allowing workers' compensation benefits for Jason L. Collins' occupational disease claim involving cumulative trauma to his back and right lower extremity sustained while employed as a truck driver/laborer. The Commission rejected the employer's argument that an untimely answer resulted in admission of all facts including legal conclusions about whether the injury arose out of employment.

occupational disease9,505 words
affirmed

The Labor and Industrial Relations Commission affirmed the administrative law judge's award of death benefits to the widow of Russell Hayes, a volunteer firefighter killed in the line of duty. The majority awarded death benefits at the statutory minimum wage rate of $40.00 per week, though a dissenting opinion argued for a higher wage determination based on the statutory provisions for calculating average weekly earnings.

occupational disease5,849 words
affirmed

The Labor and Industrial Relations Commission affirmed the administrative law judge's award of workers' compensation benefits to Elizabeth A. Steele for injuries sustained when a patient slammed his leg down on her head, neck, and shoulders while she was working as a critical care unit nurse. The Commission found the award was supported by competent and substantial evidence and determined the employee is entitled to permanent and total disability benefits.

occupational disease10,794 words
affirmed

The Labor and Industrial Relations Commission affirmed the administrative law judge's award denying compensation to Carl Hanes for an alleged occupational disease from radiation exposure at the Department of Corrections. The Commission found the employee failed to provide proper notice and that the injury did not arise out of and in the course of employment, resulting in no benefits awarded.

occupational disease6,305 words

The Labor and Industrial Relations Commission affirmed the Administrative Law Judge's Temporary or Partial Award in a workers' compensation case for employee Cynthia Porter, finding the award supported by competent and substantial evidence. The Commission upheld the ALJ's determination that the claimant's diabetes was well-controlled, rejecting the employer/insurer's challenge to this medical finding.

occupational disease7,008 words