Kenneth Shrader v. City of Mullens

West Virginia Supreme Court

Kenneth Shrader v. City of Mullens

DecidedOctober 30, 2024

Docket23-631

StatusPublished

This text of Kenneth Shrader v. City of Mullens (Kenneth Shrader v. City of Mullens) 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

Kenneth Shrader v. City of Mullens, (W. Va. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

FILED October 30, 2024 C. CASEY FORBES, CLERK STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS

Kenneth Shrader, Claimant Below, Petitioner

v.) No. 23-631 (JCN: 2020015951) (ICA No. 22-ICA-216)

City of Mullens, Employer Below, Respondent

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Petitioner Kenneth Shrader appeals the September 26, 2023, memorandum decision of the Intermediate Court of Appeals of West Virginia (“ICA”). See Shrader v. City of Mullens, No. 23- ICA-216, 2023 WL 6290098 (W. Va. Ct. App. Sept. 26, 2023) (memorandum decision). Respondent City of Mullens (“City”) filed a timely response.1 The issue on appeal is whether the ICA erred in affirming the May 1, 2023, decision of the West Virginia Workers’ Compensation Board of Review, which reversed the claim administrator’s April 20, 2021, order and granted a 4% permanent partial disability award instead of a 3% award.

The claimant asserts that the medical evidence shows that he should be granted an award of 12% permanent partial disability. The City counters by arguing that the record before the Board of Review supported the 4% permanent partial disability award. The City further maintains that the claimant points to no erroneous procedure, no arbitrary or capricious conclusions, and no abuse of discretion or jurisdictional error by the tribunals below.

This Court reviews questions of law de novo, while we accord deference to the Board of Review’s findings of fact unless the findings are clearly wrong. Syl. Pt. 3, Duff v. Kanawha Cnty. Comm’n, --- W. Va. ---, 905 S.E.2d 528 (2024). Upon consideration of the record and briefs, we find no reversible error and therefore summarily affirm. See W. Va. R. App. P. 21(c).

Affirmed.

1 The claimant is represented by counsel Reginald D. Henry and Lori J. Withrow, and the City is represented by counsel Jeffrey M. Carder.

1 ISSUED: October 30, 2024

CONCURRED IN BY:

Chief Justice Tim Armstead Justice Elizabeth D. Walker Justice John A. Hutchison Justice William R. Wooton Justice C. Haley Bunn

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

FILED October 30, 2024 C. CASEY FORBES, CLERK STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS

Kenneth Shrader, Claimant Below, Petitioner

v.) No. 23-631 (JCN: 2020015951) (ICA No. 22-ICA-216)

City of Mullens, Employer Below, Respondent

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Petitioner Kenneth Shrader appeals the September 26, 2023, memorandum decision of the Intermediate Court of Appeals of West Virginia (“ICA”). See Shrader v. City of Mullens, No. 23- ICA-216, 2023 WL 6290098 (W. Va. Ct. App. Sept. 26, 2023) (memorandum decision). Respondent City of Mullens (“City”) filed a timely response.1 The issue on appeal is whether the ICA erred in affirming the May 1, 2023, decision of the West Virginia Workers’ Compensation Board of Review, which reversed the claim administrator’s April 20, 2021, order and granted a 4% permanent partial disability award instead of a 3% award.

The claimant asserts that the medical evidence shows that he should be granted an award of 12% permanent partial disability. The City counters by arguing that the record before the Board of Review supported the 4% permanent partial disability award. The City further maintains that the claimant points to no erroneous procedure, no arbitrary or capricious conclusions, and no abuse of discretion or jurisdictional error by the tribunals below.

This Court reviews questions of law de novo, while we accord deference to the Board of Review’s findings of fact unless the findings are clearly wrong. Syl. Pt. 3, Duff v. Kanawha Cnty. Comm’n, --- W. Va. ---, 905 S.E.2d 528 (2024). Upon consideration of the record and briefs, we find no reversible error and therefore summarily affirm. See W. Va. R. App. P. 21(c).

Affirmed.

1 The claimant is represented by counsel Reginald D. Henry and Lori J. Withrow, and the City is represented by counsel Jeffrey M. Carder.

1 ISSUED: October 30, 2024

CONCURRED IN BY:

Chief Justice Tim Armstead Justice Elizabeth D. Walker Justice John A. Hutchison Justice William R. Wooton Justice C. Haley Bunn

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Kenneth Shrader v. City of Mullens, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kenneth-shrader-v-city-of-mullens-wva-2024.