John Jude v. Spartan Mining Company

CourtWest Virginia Supreme Court
DecidedApril 20, 2022
Docket21-0110
StatusPublished

This text of John Jude v. Spartan Mining Company (John Jude v. Spartan Mining Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering West Virginia Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
John Jude v. Spartan Mining Company, (W. Va. 2022).

Opinion

FILED April 20, 2022 EDYTHE NASH GAISER, CLERK SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA

STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA

SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS

JOHN JUDE, Claimant Below, Petitioner

vs.) No. 21-0110 (BOR Appeal No. 2055611) (Claim No. 2018013970)

SPARTAN MINING COMPANY, Employer Below, Respondent

MEMORANDUM DECISION Petitioner John Jude, by Counsel Lori J. Withrow, appeals the decision of the West Virginia Workers’ Compensation Board of Review (“Board of Review”). Spartan Mining Company, by Counsel Sean Harter, filed a timely response.

The issues on appeal are an additional compensable condition, medical benefits, and temporary total disability benefits. The claims administrator denied a request for a neurosurgical consultation on July 17, 2019. On September 9, 2019, the claims administrator denied the addition of thoracic disc protrusion to the claim. The claims administrator denied a request for an EMG/NCS on September 10, 2019. On December 16, 2019, the claims administrator closed the claim for temporary total disability benefits. The Workers’ Compensation Office of Judges (“Office of Judges”) affirmed the decisions in its August 13, 2010, Order. The Order was affirmed by the Board of Review on January 21, 2021.

The Court has carefully reviewed the records, written arguments, and appendices contained in the briefs, and the case is mature for consideration. The facts and legal arguments are adequately presented, and the decisional process would not be significantly aided by oral argument. Upon consideration of the standard of review, the briefs, and the record presented, the Court finds no substantial question of law and no prejudicial error. For these reasons, a memorandum decision is appropriate under Rule 21 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.

The standard of review applicable to this Court’s consideration of workers’ compensation appeals has been set out under W. Va. Code § 23-5-15, in relevant part, as follows:

1 (c) In reviewing a decision of the Board of Review, the Supreme Court of Appeals shall consider the record provided by the board and give deference to the board’s findings, reasoning, and conclusions . . . .

(d) If the decision of the board represents an affirmation of a prior ruling by both the commission and the Office of Judges that was entered on the same issue in the same claim, the decision of the board may be reversed or modified by the Supreme Court of Appeals only if the decision is in clear violation of constitutional or statutory provision, is clearly the result of erroneous conclusions of law, or is based upon the board’s material misstatement or mischaracterization of particular components of the evidentiary record. The court may not conduct a de novo reweighing of the evidentiary record . . . .

See Hammons v. W. Va. Off. of Ins. Comm’r, 235 W. Va. 577, 582-83, 775 S.E.2d 458, 463-64 (2015). As we previously recognized in Justice v. West Virginia Office Insurance Commission, 230 W. Va. 80, 83, 736 S.E.2d 80, 83 (2012), we apply a de novo standard of review to questions of law arising in the context of decisions issued by the Board. See also Davies v. W. Va. Off. of Ins. Comm’r, 227 W. Va. 330, 334, 708 S.E.2d 524, 528 (2011).

Mr. Jude, an underground coal miner, injured his cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine when the channel locks he was using slipped, causing him to fall backwards and land on a rock on December 8, 2017. Mr. Jude had preexisting back issues that began long before the compensable injury occurred. An October 5, 2011, treatment note from Family Healthcare Associates indicates Mr. Jude was still having back and leg symptoms. Thoracic spine x-rays were performed on November 8, 2011, due to low back pain with radiculopathy. The x-ray showed mild joint space narrowing at the lower thoracic levels. A November 10, 2011, treatment note from Family Healthcare Associates indicates Mr. Jude was seen for lumbar pain with radiculopathy. He returned on November 14, 2011, with the same complaints. October 14, 2013, lumbar x-rays showed degenerative joint disease bilaterally at L5-S1. A lumbar MRI was performed on October 22, 2013, due to persistent low back pain following an October 13, 2013, lifting injury. The MRI showed an unchanged T12-L1 disc protrusion and left L5-S1 disc osteophyte complex causing moderate neural foraminal stenosis. There was no evidence of acute injury. Finally, in a March 10, 2014, treatment note, Jackie Shorter Jr., PA-C, diagnosed lumbar sprain and stated that Mr. Jude was unable to work for four more weeks. Mr. Jude returned on April 1, 2014, and was diagnosed with lumbago.

Mr. Jude completed an Employees’ and Physicians’ Report of Injury on December 8, 2017, indicating he injured his entire back when channel locks slipped off a lapping belt and threw him backwards. He landed on top of a rock. The physicians’ section lists the diagnoses as lumbar, cervical, and thoracic spine sprains. Mr. Jude was to remain off of work from December 11, 2017, until December 25, 2017. The claims administrator rejected the claim on January 4, 2018. On January 22, 2018, Mr. Jude sought treatment from Family Healthcare Associates for lumbago and lumbar strain, among other things. A thoracic spine MRI, performed on April 3, 2018, showed small disc protrusions at T1-2 and T6-7. At T9-11 there was a small syrinx noted. Mild degenerative changes with disc space narrowing were also noted. 2 In a February 14, 2019, Independent Medical Evaluation, Prasadarao Mukkamala, M.D., noted that prior to the alleged injury, Mr. Jude had evidence of degenerative thoracic and degenerative spine spondyloarthropathy, as noted in medical records as early as 2011. Dr. Mukkamala opined that there was no credible evidence that Mr. Jude sustained a compensable injury on December 8, 2017. Dr. Mukkamala stated that Mr. Jude had reached maximum medical improvement for his reported symptoms and required no further treatment.

The Office of Judges reversed the rejection of the claim and held the claim compensable for strain of the muscle, facia, and tendon of the neck, thorax back wall, and lower back in its June 5, 2019, Order. On July 2, 2019, the claims administrator granted temporary total disability benefits from December 11, 2017, through January 26, 2018.

Ronald Fadel, M.D., performed a Utilization Review on July 13, 2019, in which he opined that the mechanism of injury appeared to be blunt force trauma after Mr. Jude fell backwards. Dr. Fadel stated that a neurosurgical consultation seems to be necessary for Mr. Jude due to a finding of a syrinx; however, such condition is acquired and not the result of the compensable injury. Therefore, the referral should be denied. The claims administrator denied a request for a neurosurgical consultation on July 17, 2019.

In an August 28, 2019, Diagnosis Update, Dr. Muscari stated that thoracic disc protrusion should be added to the claim. Mr. Jude returned to PA-C Shorter on August 29, 2019. He reported that he still had back pain with radiculopathy, numbness, and range of motion loss. Mr. Shorter diagnosed neck, thoracic, and lumbar strains. The claims administrator denied the addition of thoracic disc protrusion to the claim on September 9, 2019. On September 10, 2019, the claims administrator denied a request for an EMG/NCS. In a September 18, 2019, letter, Dr. Muscari stated that he was unable to give an updated treatment plan for Mr. Jude until such time that a neurosurgical consultation and an EMG/NCS were performed.

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

Related

Barnett v. State Workmen's Compensation Commissioner
172 S.E.2d 698 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1970)
Gary E. Hammons v. W. Va. Ofc. of Insurance Comm./A & R Transport, etc.
775 S.E.2d 458 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 2015)
Davies v. Wv Office of the Insurance Commission, 35550 (w.va. 4-1-2011)
708 S.E.2d 524 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 2011)
Justice v. West Virginia Office Insurance Commission
736 S.E.2d 80 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
John Jude v. Spartan Mining Company, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/john-jude-v-spartan-mining-company-wva-2022.