Skip to content
Ott Law Firm

Timothy Pearson v. Henry's Wrecker Service

Decision date: December 11, 201219 pages

Summary

The LIRC modified the administrative law judge's decision to allow compensation for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) resulting from a February 7, 2009 work accident involving a tow-truck driver. The decision addresses disputes regarding permanent partial disability, temporary total disability, medical expenses, and the credibility of medical experts regarding the employee's injuries.

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 ALLOWING COMPENSATION (Modifying Award and Decision of Administrative Law Judge)
Employee:Timothy Pearson
Employer:Henry’s Wrecker Service
Insurer:Commerce and Industry Insurance Co. c/o Chartis
Additional Party:Treasurer of Missouri as Custodian of Second Injury Fund (Dismissed)
This workers’ compensation case is submitted to the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) for review as provided by § 287.480 RSMo. We have reviewed the evidence, read the parties’ briefs, and considered the whole record. Pursuant to § 286.090 RSMo, we modify the award and decision of the administrative law judge. We adopt the findings, conclusions, decision, and award of the administrative law judge to the extent that they are not inconsistent with the findings, conclusions, decision, and modifications set forth below.
Preliminaries
The parties asked the administrative law judge to resolve the following issues: (1) whether the injury arose out of the employment; (2) whether the injury was within the course of employment; (3) the nature and extent of any permanent partial disability; (4) whether the condition is medically and causally related to the work accident; (5) whether the employee is entitled to reimbursement of additional past medical expenses in the amount of $93,797.97; (6) whether employee is entitled to future medical expenses; and (7) whether employee is entitled to additional temporary total disability benefits through April 30, 2011.
The administrative law judge rendered the following findings and conclusions: (1) employee suffered an accident; (2) employee is credible to the extent that he sustained injuries by accident, but he has exaggerated the extent of his ongoing symptoms and is malingering; (3) employee suffered a 7.5% permanent partial disability of the body as a whole as a result of the work accident; (4) employee reached maximum medical improvement with respect to his work-related injuries when he was released by employer’s authorized treating physician on August 6, 2009; (5) employee’s seizures, hand tremors, right leg sensory deficit, and right foot drop did not result from the work accident; (6) employee did not sustain any psychiatric injury or psychological condition as a result of the accident; (7) employee is not entitled to his past medical expenses in the amount of $93,797.97; and (8) employee is not entitled to temporary total disability benefits after August 6, 2009.
Employee filed a timely Application for Review with the Commission alleging the administrative law judge erred: (1) in failing to consider the opinions from employee’s treating doctors and psychologists on the issue whether employee sustained post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) as a result of the work accident; (2) in denying employee’s claim for past medical expenses for PTSD; (3) in denying employee’s claim for permanent partial disability, temporary total disability, and medical expenses based on the testimony from Dr. Hughes because Dr. Hughes finds malingering or lack of

- 2 -

permanent disability in 75% to 100% of cases; and (4) in finding Dr. Corsolini more credible than other doctors.

On June 19, 2012, employer filed a Motion to Dismiss Or In The Alternative For A More Definite And Certain Application For Review (Motion). On June 27, 2012, we denied employer's Motion.

Findings of Fact

The administrative law judge's award sets forth the stipulations of the parties and the administrative law judge's findings of fact on the issues disputed at the hearing. We adopt and incorporate those findings to the extent that they are not inconsistent with the modifications set forth in our award. Consequently, we make only those findings of fact pertinent to our modifications herein.

Post-traumatic stress disorder

On February 7, 2009, this tow-truck driver employee was assisting a stranded motorist when a passing truck veered toward him. Employee tried to jump onto the bed of the tow-truck but the oncoming truck's mirror hit his right hand as it passed at highway speed, causing him to twist his torso. Diagnostic studies suggested employee sustained no internal physical injuries, but employee continued to complain of extreme pain, sleep interruption, cognitive problems and memory loss, and a dramatic tremor in his right hand, none of which the doctors could explain. Employer's authorized treating physician Dr. Corsolini suspected a psychiatric component to employee's problems, but before a neuropsychiatric evaluation could be accomplished, employer's insurer sent employee for a functional capacity evaluation, where he failed the validity criteria. Employer then denied any further authorized treatment without looking into the question of psychiatric injury. Employee subsequently underwent extensive unauthorized treatment for his pain complaints, symptoms such as a hand tremor and right leg sensory deficit, and also for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The primary issue before us is whether the accident caused PTSD. The parties present conflicting testimony from several doctors.

Employee presents Drs. Swaim, Pro, Stuckmeyer, and the psychologist Suzanne McKenna, each of whom opined employee developed PTSD as a result of the accident. Employer's psychologist Dale Halfaker also opined employee possibly has PTSD. On the other hand, employer presents Dr. Hughes, who opined employee is a "fraud" who "made up" his PTSD symptoms.

The ALJ credited Dr. Hughes's theory that employee did not sustain PTSD as a result of the accident because PTSD symptoms are supposed to appear within an hour to two weeks after trauma, and employee's symptoms didn't emerge until months later. But this theory ignores the fact employee was complaining about sleep disturbance (one of the primary symptoms of PTSD) in his initial treatments with Dr. Corsolini following the accident, and continued to do so until he received treatment on his own for PTSD. And Dr. Hughes agreed on cross-examination that the DSM-IV¹ states PTSD symptoms can

¹ Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition. Dr. Hughes agreed this is the authoritative text for classification/description of psychiatric disorders.

Improve: Timothy Pearson

- 3 -

occur months or years after trauma. When asked to explain, in light of this admission, why he believed employee's symptoms should have appeared immediately, Dr. Hughes opined that delayed onset cases are usually the result of more intense traumas like childhood sex abuse or military service. This testimony suggests Dr. Hughes believes the accident just wasn't serious or traumatic enough, even though employee was exposed to the imminent threat of catastrophic injury or death when he narrowly avoided a direct bodily impact from the speeding truck. We note that Dr. Hughes also failed to recognize that Dr. Kukal treated employee for PTSD, and that these treatments helped resolve his symptoms.

After careful consideration of all the expert medical testimony on the issue, we disagree with the administrative law judge that Dr. Hughes is more credible than the other doctors. Throughout his report and testimony, Dr. Hughes digressed from the purely medical issue presented and ventured into personal attacks on employee. For example, Dr. Hughes dismissed employee's symptoms as "bogus," mocked employee's religious beliefs, and even went so far as to recommend employee be investigated for insurance fraud. By way of comparison, Dr. Corsolini, when asked about comments in his treatment notes indicating employee was lapsing into a disabled role, testified: "I don't claim to read people's minds. It's just a way of trying to describe what I see. Now, lapsing into the disabled role is again not necessarily someone [sic] does on purpose. It's a lot more complicated than that." Faced with a complicated issue of medical causation, we find no assistance in Dr. Hughes's glib take on employee's psychiatric complaints.

We find more credible Drs. Swaim, Stuckmeyer, and Pro on the issue whether employee developed PTSD as a result of the accident. Employee testified that his treatment for PTSD resulted in an excellent recovery, but Dr. Pro opined that employee will remain more susceptible to PTSD as a result of the accident. In light of these factors, we find that employee's permanent disability referable to PTSD amounts to a 17.5% permanent partial psychiatric disability of the body as a whole.

There remains the issue of employee's pseudo-seizures, inexplicable hand tremor, and right leg sensory deficit with foot drop. None of employee's experts were able to credibly testify that these symptoms were associated with PTSD or otherwise linked to the accident. Dr. Swaim acknowledged that he could not state that the accident was the prevailing factor causing employee to suffer seizures or foot drop. Dr. Pro testified that "at least to a certain extent" the "trajectory of the problem would suggest" that the accident caused employee to suffer some seizures, but also testified that we don't really know what caused them. To the extent Dr. Pro opined that employee's seizures, tremors, and foot drop were caused by the work injury, we find his testimony lacking credibility.

**Conclusions of Law**

**Medical causation of PTSD**

Section 287.020.3(1) RSMo sets forth the standard for medical causation applicable to this claim and provides, as follows:

An injury by accident is compensable only if the accident was the prevailing factor in causing both the resulting medical condition and

Employee: Timothy Pearson

disability. "The prevailing factor" is defined to be the primary factor, in relation to any other factor, causing both the resulting medical condition and disability.

We have credited the testimony from Drs. Swaim, Stuckmeyer, and Pro on the issue whether employee developed PTSD as a result of the accident. But as to employee's seizures, hand tremors, and foot drop, we have found lacking credibility Dr. Pro's testimony linking these symptoms to the work injury or to PTSD. Dr. Pro's obviously strained testimony strikes us as falling below the prevailing factor standard. None of employee's other experts were able to credibly testify that these symptoms resulted from the accident, and Dr. Swaim acknowledged he could not state that the accident was a prevailing factor causing the seizures or foot drop.

Consequently, we conclude the February 2009 accident was the prevailing factor causing employee to sustain PTSD with a 17.5\% permanent partial psychiatric disability of the body as a whole, but that the accident was not the prevailing factor causing employee to develop seizures, right upper extremity tremors, or right leg sensory deficit with foot drop. Employer is liable for additional permanent partial disability benefits referable to PTSD.

Temporary total disability

Section 287.170 RSMo provides for temporary total disability benefits to cover an employee's healing period following a compensable work injury. The test for temporary total disability is whether, given employee's condition, an employer in the usual course of business would reasonably be expected to employ him during the time period claimed. Cooper v. Medical Ctr. of Independence, 955 S.W.2d 570, 575 (Mo. App. 1997). Accordingly, we look to evidence of employee's condition in the time period following the accident.

Dr. Pro testified employee was temporarily and totally disabled owing to PTSD and depression from the date of the accident until he went back to work in May 2011 as a trash hauler. The record reveals that Dr. Kukal released employee from treatment for PTSD on May 1, 2011. Employee was suffering from severe sleep disturbance, emotional problems, and cognition/memory lapses, and testified he was unable to work during this time period. We are persuaded that an employer in the usual course of business would not reasonably be expected to hire employee during this time period. We conclud

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