DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES v. BRUCE

2016 OK 43, 371 P.3d 484, 2016 Okla. LEXIS 44, 2016 WL 1573867
CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma
DecidedApril 19, 2016
Docket112,070
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 2016 OK 43 (DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES v. BRUCE) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES v. BRUCE, 2016 OK 43, 371 P.3d 484, 2016 Okla. LEXIS 44, 2016 WL 1573867 (Okla. 2016).

Opinion

GURICH, J.

11 Claimant Nancy Bruce worked as a Certified Nurse's Assistant, or "residential life staff aide," for the Oklahoma Department of Human Services for twenty-six years where her duties consisted primarily. of lifting clients, cleaning them up, feeding them, and daily care. On May 14, 2012, Claimant was. injured while lifting one such 'client. Upon attempting to lift the client, Claimant stated she felt immediate pain in her neck and a shocking and tearing sensation which shot down her left arm and into her thumb. Claimant reported the injury to her supervisor and went to the emergency room where it was recommended she follow up with a pain management doctor. . Claimant then went to Dr. Cheng, who performed an examination and x-rays. Dr. Cheng also ordered an MRI of Claimant's cervical spine. The MRI indicated "severe left neuroforaminal narrowing from dise herniations at C5-6 and C6-7." 1 Dr. Cheng referred her to a neurosurgeon, Dr. Pollard, who saw Claimant on June 11, 2012, Around this time, Employer's insurance carrier appointed a case manager, D.J. Smith, to Claimant's case. Although Dr. Pollard recommended a two-level anterior cervical fusion, and scheduled Claimant's surgery on four separate occasions, the case manager for Employer's insurance company refused to authorize any further treatment.

12 The case manager then sent Claimant to Dr. Snell of Neuroscience Specialists, who evaluated Claimant on November 1, 2012. Dr. Snell found Claimant was temporarily totally disabled and recommended a "C5-6, , C6-7 ACDF with allograft bone and plating." 2 Apparently still unhappy with the surgical recommendation of Dr. Snell, the insurance company then deposed, Dr. Snell, wherein the attorney for the insurance company presented Dr. Snell with Claimant's testimony from a prior trial in 2006 wherein Claimant testified to having pain and numbness in her left arm.. Although, Dr. Snell was fully aware of Claimant's previous injuries, as reported in his evaluation of November 1, 2012, Dr. Snell stated that unless he was able to reexamine Claimant, he could no longer say with a reasonable degree of medical certainty that the major. cause of Claimant's injury was the May 14, 2012 injury. |

13 On February 7, 2013, Dr. Snell reevaluated Claimant.~ Dr. Snell specifically asked Claimant about her previous testimony *486 regarding her left arm pain. Dr. Snell's report from the February 7, 2018 evaluation provides:

HISTORY OF PRESENT ILLNESS
During the deposition there were some questions about sworn testimony that she had. I questioned her about this today. She tells me that the pain that she was having at the time that she was giving sworn testimony was more of kind of an achy kind of tension pain in the arm and it was not an electric shock kind of pain, which is the kind of pain she had after her work related injury. She also said that the «chiropractic had given her significant improvement, and although she did not have complete resolution [sic] there were definitely times between 2009 and her work injury in 2012 where she had potentially months of improvement to the point where she was not really having much arm pain, She said that her chiropractic visit frequency decreased significantly because of that associated improvement.
[[Image here]]
CAUSATION
She reports to me she had problems with her neck really ever since 9-10 years ago. She also reports that she had some problems with some pain in the left arm which was more kind of a stretching tension kind of pain and that the chiropractic had significantly helped her with this to the point where she had several periods where she had months where she was not really having any arm pain prior to her work-related injury. She reports that after the 05/14/12 work related injury she started having electric shock type pain in the left arm, which was a new pain she had not experienced before. As such, it would appear that her work-related injury resulted in her symptomatic onset of this electric shock type pain going down the left arm. Certainly, it appears that she has had problems with left arm pain in the past, as noted above. Per her report today, the quality of her left arm pain changed significantly to a neuropathic kind of shocking type pain. -It would appear that the onset of the shocking type neuropathic pain was related to her work-related injury, per her report.
The above opinions are based on a reasonable degree of medical certainty. 3

Notably, Dr. Snell's February 7, 2013 evaluation also states: "I had recommended a C5-6, C6-7 ACDF with allograft bone and plating for her at the 11/01/12 visit and I continue to recommend this.... She is currently TTD and I will keep her at TTD." 4

14 In addition to Dr. Snell's evaluation, Claimant was also evaluated by. Dr. Wolf on July 30, 2012. Dr, Wolf, who was also aware of Claimant's previous complaints of pain in her neck, found as follows:

The patient was involved in an on—the—Job accident on May 14, 2012, while employed «by Noree (Oklahoma Department of Human. Services), It is my opinion that as a result of this on-the-job accident, the patient has sustained injury to her cervical spine.. She continues to have ongoing pain and upper extremity radicular symptoms primarily on the left side, to include weakness of the left arm and weakness in grip strength along with numbness in the thumb. The patient does have significant MRJ findings of internal derangement of the cervical spine. She is in need of further neurosurgical consultation.
In my medical opinion, the major cause of her injury and ongoing complaints and symptomatology is the accident on May 14, 2012, while employed by Norce (Oklahoma Department of Human Services): She does have objective medical evidence as well as permanent anatomical abnormalities as previously set forth. After taking a history, reviewihg the available medical records, and performing a physical examination I find that this patient is temporarily totally disabled from her usual occupation, secondary.to this job-related injury, from May 14, 2012, and she will continue to be temporarily totally disabled until there is a resolution of her *487 symptoms by additional testing and/or treatment or until in my medical opinion she has reached maximum medical improvement. 5

[5 On November 19, 2012, Claimant was evaluated, at the insurance carrier's request, by Dr. Munneke. Although Dr. Munneke opined that the "patient did sustain a strain injury to her cervical spine as a result of her accident on the aforementioned date [May 14, 2012]," he concluded that the "patient's need for surgery is unrelated to her accident that occurred on the 14th of May 2012." 6 Dr. Munneke found that the surgical recommendation of Dr. Snell was "related to her two prior injuries that occurred in 2008 and 2004." 7

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES v. BRUCE
2016 OK 43 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2016 OK 43, 371 P.3d 484, 2016 Okla. LEXIS 44, 2016 WL 1573867, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/department-of-human-services-v-bruce-okla-2016.