Employers Ins. Co. of Nevada v. Sunada

Nevada Supreme Court

Employers Ins. Co. of Nevada v. Sunada

DecidedApril 17, 2015

Docket63167

StatusUnpublished

This text of Employers Ins. Co. of Nevada v. Sunada (Employers Ins. Co. of Nevada v. Sunada) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nevada Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Employers Ins. Co. of Nevada v. Sunada, (Neb. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

unable to work. The only physician's opinion in the record that addressed respondent's work abilities is Dr. Patrick McNulty's May 31, 2011, evaluation, which opined that although respondent's condition "prevents him from definitely going back to work as a driver," respondent could return to "modified duty as per [his] previous long-term work restrictions." Because respondent's treating physician determined that respondent could return to modified duty, and because there is no other medical opinion in the record to the contrary, we conclude that substantial evidence does not support the appeals officer's determination that respondent was entitled to ongoing TTD benefits. See NRS 616C.475(5)(a) (explaining that TTD benefits must cease when a physician determines that the injured worker is physically capable of any gainful employment for which the employee is suited); Nev. Indus. Comm'n v. Taylor, 98 Nev. 131, 132-33, 642 P.2d 598, 599 (1982) (holding that when "[t]here was no competent medical authority contrary" to the injured worker's treating physician's opinion releasing him to work, TTD benefits must cease until competent medical authority determined otherwise). Accordingly, appellant properly terminated respondent's TTD benefits, and we reverse the district court's order denying the petition for judicial review. See Vredenburg v. Sedgwick CMS, 124 Nev. 553, 557, 188 P.3d 1084, 1087-88 (2008) (reviewing an appeals officer's fact-based conclusions of law for substantial evidence). It is so ORDERED.

Gibbons Pickering

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A cc: Hon. Kathleen E. Delaney, District Judge Janet Trost, Settlement Judge Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, LLP/Las Vegas Shook & Stone, Chtd. Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A cselo

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

unable to work. The only physician's opinion in the record that addressed respondent's work abilities is Dr. Patrick McNulty's May 31, 2011, evaluation, which opined that although respondent's condition "prevents him from definitely going back to work as a driver," respondent could return to "modified duty as per [his] previous long-term work restrictions." Because respondent's treating physician determined that respondent could return to modified duty, and because there is no other medical opinion in the record to the contrary, we conclude that substantial evidence does not support the appeals officer's determination that respondent was entitled to ongoing TTD benefits. See NRS 616C.475(5)(a) (explaining that TTD benefits must cease when a physician determines that the injured worker is physically capable of any gainful employment for which the employee is suited); Nev. Indus. Comm'n v. Taylor, 98 Nev. 131, 132-33, 642 P.2d 598, 599 (1982) (holding that when "[t]here was no competent medical authority contrary" to the injured worker's treating physician's opinion releasing him to work, TTD benefits must cease until competent medical authority determined otherwise). Accordingly, appellant properly terminated respondent's TTD benefits, and we reverse the district court's order denying the petition for judicial review. See Vredenburg v. Sedgwick CMS, 124 Nev. 553, 557, 188 P.3d 1084, 1087-88 (2008) (reviewing an appeals officer's fact-based conclusions of law for substantial evidence). It is so ORDERED.

Gibbons Pickering

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A cc: Hon. Kathleen E. Delaney, District Judge Janet Trost, Settlement Judge Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, LLP/Las Vegas Shook & Stone, Chtd. Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A cselo

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Employers Ins. Co. of Nevada v. Sunada, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/employers-ins-co-of-nevada-v-sunada-nev-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack