Robert Blair v. Ryerson, Inc.

Issued by THE LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION

(Affirming Award and Decision of Administrative Law Judge with Supplemental Opinion)

**Injury No.:** 15-028504

**Employee:** Robert Blair

**Employer:** Ryerson, Inc.

**Insurer:** Travelers Indemnity Company of America

This 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, we find that the award of the administrative law judge denying compensation is supported by competent and substantial evidence and was made in accordance with the Missouri Workers' Compensation Law. Pursuant to § 286.090 RSMo, we affirm the award and decision of the administrative law judge with this supplemental opinion.

In the Final Award, the administrative law judge found more credible the opinions of Dr. Strong and Dr. Satterlee that the April 28, 2015 accident was not the prevailing factor in causing employee's medical condition. Award, page 8. The administrative law judge specifically pointed out that both Dr. Strong and Dr. Satterlee were board certified shoulder specialists with active orthopedic surgery practices. *Id.* The administrative law judge then stated, "the expert conclusions of Drs. Strong and Satterlee should be afforded greater weight than the opinion of an occupational medicine doctor given their specialized training and active orthopedic practices." *Id.*

We disavow any suggestion that a medical expert's opinions are necessarily entitled to greater weight simply because of specialized training or experience. The credibility of expert witnesses must be evaluated in a much broader context. Having said this, the unimpeached testimony of a surgeon regarding findings visualized in the course of a procedure are clearly entitled to great weight.

An expert's background and experience are obviously factors to be considered and, when all other factors are relatively equal, may render one opinion more persuasive than another. Here, it does appear that Dr. Kopravica's opinions may have been based on incomplete information and/or based on assumptions not proven.

The administrative law judge's analysis, overall, is correct.

Because we agree with the administrative law judge's determination that the April 28, 2015 accident was not the prevailing factor in causing employee's medical condition, we must deny the claim. All other issues are moot.

- 2 -

We affirm and adopt the award of the administrative law judge as supplemented herein.

The award and decision of Administrative Law Judge Angie Heffner, issued June 5, 2017, is attached and incorporated herein to the extent not inconsistent with this supplemental decision.

Given at Jefferson City, State of Missouri, this **27th** day of July 2018.

**LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION**


**John J. Larsen, Jr., Chairman**

**Reid K. Forrester, Member**

Attest:

**Curtis E. Chick, Jr., Member**

**Secretary**

Issued by Division of Workers' Compensation

Employee: Robert Blair

Injury No. 15-028504

Employee: Robert Blair

Injury No. 15-028504

Employer: Ryerson, Inc.

Insurer: Travelers Indemnity Company of America

Hearing Date: April 20, 2017

Checked by AH/pd

1. Are any benefits awarded herein? No

1. Was the injury or occupational disease compensable under Chapter 287? No

1. Was there an accident or incident of occupational disease under the Law? Yes

1. Date of accident or onset of occupational disease: April 28, 2015

1. State location where accident occurred or occupational disease was contracted Kansas City, Jackson County, Missouri

1. Was above employee in employ of above employer at time of alleged accident or occupational disease? Yes

1. Did employer receive proper notice? Yes

1. Did accident or occupational disease arise out of and in the course of the employment? No

1. Was claim for compensation filed within the time required by Law? Yes

1. Was employer insured by above insurer? Yes

1. Describe work employee was doing and how accident occurred or occupational disease contracted: While in the course and scope of his employment, Employee was pulling a chain to move a heavy piece of steel when he felt severe pain in his left shoulder.

1. Did accident or occupational disease cause death? No

1. Part(s) of body injured by accident or occupational disease: None

1. Nature and extent of any permanent disability: None

Issued by Division of Workers' Compensation

Employee: Robert Blair

Injury No. 15-028504

1. Compensation paid to date for temporary disability: None

1. Value necessary medical aid paid to date by employer/insurer: $5,537.77

1. Value of medical aid not furnished by employer/insurer: 73,805.85

1. Employee's average weekly wages: 1,100.00

1. Weekly compensation rate: 733.33 for temporary total disability and 451.02 for permanent partial disability.

1. Method of wage computation: By agreement of the parties.

COMPENSATION PAYABLE

1. Amount of compensation payable: None.

Issued by Division of Workers' Compensation

Employee: Robert Blair

Injury No.: 15-028504

Employer: Ryerson, Inc.

Insurer: Travelers Indemnity Company of America

Hearing Date: April 20, 2017

Checked by: AH/pd

A final evidentiary hearing was held in this case on Employee's claim against Employer on April 20, 2017 in Kansas City, Missouri. Employee, Robert Blair (Claimant or Employee), appeared in person and by his attorney, John O'Connor. Employer, Ryerson, Inc., and Insurer, Travelers Indemnity Company of America, appeared by their attorney, Brent Johnston. The parties agreed that post-hearing briefs would be due on May 22, 2017.

STIPULATIONS

At the time of the hearing, the parties stipulated to the following:

1. On or about April 28, 2015, Robert Blair was an employee of Ryerson, Inc. (Employer) and was working under the provisions of the Missouri Workers' Compensation Law.

1. On or about April 28, 2015, Employer was an employer operating under the provisions of the Missouri Workers' Compensation Law and was fully insured by Travelers Indemnity Company of America.

1. Employee's contract of employment was made in Missouri.

1. Employee timely notified Employer of his injury.

1. Claimant's Claim for Compensation was filed within the time allowed by law.

1. The average weekly wage was 1,100.00, the rate of compensation for temporary total disability is 733.33, and the rate of compensation for permanent partial disability is $451.02 per week.

1. Employer/Insurer has not paid any temporary total disability benefits.

1. Employer/Insurer paid $5,537.77 in medical aid.

Issued by Division of Workers' Compensation

Employee: Robert Blair

Injury No. 15-028504

ISSUES

The parties agreed that there is a dispute on the following issues:

1. Whether the Employee sustained an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment;
2. Whether Employer must reimburse Employee for medical expenses totaling $73,805.85;
3. Whether Employee is entitled to temporary total disability benefits from September 30, 2015 through February 29, 2016;
4. What is the nature and extent of Claimant's disability; and
5. Whether Employer must provide Employee with medical care in the future.

Claimant testified in person. In addition, Claimant offered the following exhibits which were admitted in evidence without objection:

- Claimant's Exhibit A -- Dr. Koprivica Medical Report

- Claimant's Exhibit B -- Medical Bills

Employer/Insurer offered the following exhibits which were admitted in evidence without objection:

- Employer/Insurer's Exhibit No. 1 -- Dr. Craig Satterlee's Medical Report

- Employer/Insurer's Exhibit No. 2 -- Deposition of Dr. Satterlee

- Employer/Insurer's Exhibit No. 3 -- Dr. Alexandra Strong's Medical Report

Findings of Fact

Claimant, who is currently 64 years old, testified that he worked for the Employer operating various machines from 1992 until he retired in March 1, 2016. Claimant sustained a work-related injury to his left shoulder in 1998. Dr. Lance Bear provided treatment for a torn labrum, chondromalacia of the humeral head and glenoid, and impingement. As a result of that injury, Claimant underwent surgery. He was off work for six to eight weeks but was eventually able to return to work. Claimant settled the workers' compensation claim related to the 1998 injury for compensation representing 20% permanent partial disability of the left shoulder.

Claimant acknowledges that, although he was able to return to work following his surgery, he did have permanent problems involving the left shoulder as a result of his 1998 injury. Specifically, he acknowledges that he experienced a significant loss of range of motion due to that injury. He testified and demonstrated for the Court that following the 1998 injury but prior to the April 28, 2015 accident, he could not lift his left arm beyond ninety degrees. Claimant also confirmed that he would experience aches and

4

Issued by Division of Workers' Compensation

Employee: Robert Blair

Injury No. 15-028504

pains in his left shoulder during and after strenuous work. He also acknowledges he was told by Dr. Lance Bear, the surgeon who provided treatment for his 1998 injury, that he had significant cartilage changes throughout the glenohumeral joint in 1998 and would likely need a total shoulder replacement. (Ex. 3, p. 28) However, Claimant hoped to be able to work until he was sixty five years old, at which time he planned to retire.

On April 28, 2015 while pulling on a chain to move a heavy piece of steel, Claimant experienced a significant increase in pain in his left shoulder. Claimant notified Employer of his symptoms, and he was sent for authorized medical care at North Kansas City Hospital. Diagnostic studies revealed advanced degenerative joint disease of the left glenohumeral joint.

Employer subsequently arranged for Claimant to be evaluated by Dr. Alexandra Strong, who specializes in shoulder surgery, has been board certified in orthopaedic surgery since 1994, and has been board certified in orthopaedic sports medicine since 2008. Dr. Strong evaluated Claimant on May 27, 2015. She reviewed an MRI taken of Claimant's left shoulder on May 12, 2015 and confirmed that it revealed very severe glenohumeral osteoarthritis, no large rotator cuff tear, no complete tendon rupture, and that it might have shown a partial thickness tear of the supraspinatus tendon or an occult small full thickness tear of the rotator cuff. Dr. Strong offered the following expert medical opinion after examining Claimant:

Mr. Blair comes in today with left shoulder pain. He has severe [osteoarthritis] that is causing his pain. He is severely limited by his shoulder now. He has been limited with range of motion for years but now his pain is severe and his motion is worse. [He] does not have significant rotator cuff tearing to explain his change. ... But I warned him that I did not believe that it is a work comp issue. ... It is my medical opinion that based on a reasonable degree of medical certainty the patient's recent work injury is not the prevailing factor in the current symptoms and need for further treatment.

(Ex 3, p. 8)

After seeing Dr. Strong, Claimant elected to pursue additional treatment on his own with Dr. Craig Satterlee. Dr. Satterlee agreed that a total shoulder replacement would be most appropriate for Claimant and performed this procedure on September 30, 2015. In his operative report, Dr. Satterlee recorded:

At the time of surgery, fairly significant posterior glenoid wear, however, we are able to correct this with reaming, lower in the front. Rotator cuff largely looks okay. The biceps was shredded and was tenodesed in the intertubercular groove. The AC joint was quite arthritic. The glenohumeral joint had a complete los