Murray American Energy, Inc. v. Franklin Bush

CourtWest Virginia Supreme Court
DecidedJune 10, 2020
Docket18-0893
StatusPublished

This text of Murray American Energy, Inc. v. Franklin Bush (Murray American Energy, Inc. v. Franklin Bush) 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
Murray American Energy, Inc. v. Franklin Bush, (W. Va. 2020).

Opinion

STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA

SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS

MURRAY AMERICAN ENERGY, INC., FILED Employer Below, Petitioner June 10, 2020 EDYTHE NASH GAISER, CLERK SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS vs.) No. 18-0893 (BOR Appeal No. 2052860) OF WEST VIRGINIA (Claim No. 2016014547)

FRANKLIN BUSH, Claimant Below, Respondent

MEMORANDUM DECISION Petitioner Murray American Energy, Inc., by Counsel Denise D. Pentino and Aimee M. Stern, appeals the decision of the West Virginia Workers’ Compensation Board of Review (“Board of Review”). Franklin Bush, by Counsel J. Thomas Greene Jr., filed a timely response.

The issues on appeal involve temporary total disability benefits and the authorization for additional work conditioning. On August 22, 2017, the claims administrator closed the claim for temporary total disability benefits. On October 6, 2017, the claims administrator denied a request for the authorization for additional work conditioning in the claim. By Decision dated April 13, 2018, the Office of Judges ordered that the claim be reopened for additional temporary total disability benefits, for such a period of time as can be substantiated through the introduction of credible medical evidence. The Office of Judges also ordered that additional work conditioning be authorized. This appeal arises from the Board of Review’s Final Order dated September 20, 2018, in which the Board affirmed the April 13, 2018, decision of the Office of Judges. The Court has carefully reviewed the records, written arguments, and appendices contained in the briefs, and the case is mature for consideration.

This Court has considered the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal. 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.

Mr. Bush works for Murray American Energy, Inc., at the Harrison County Mine. While performing his regular duties as a roof bolter on November 30, 2015, he sustained an injury to his left shoulder. He sought treatment at Fairmont Regional Medical Center where he was evaluated 1 and diagnosed with a left shoulder sprain. He was seen by his primary care physician, Himanshu Paliwal, M.D., on December 1, 2015. Dr. Paliwal advised Mr. Bush that his injury appeared to be a rotator cuff tendonitis. Mr. Bush filed an Employees’ and Physicians’ Report of Injury on December 2, 2015. By Order of the claims administrator dated January 27, 2016, the claim was held compensable for other sprain of the left shoulder joint, initial encounter on a no lost time basis.

Mr. Bush came under the care of George Bal, M.D., with West Virginia University’s Department of Orthopedics. On February 4, 2016, Dr. Bal expressed an opinion that Mr. Bush most likely suffered a rupture of the long heard of his left bicep muscle, at the proximal insertion of the biceps to the shoulder. Dr. Bal requested authorization for a left shoulder MRI. On February 18, 2016, the claims administrator granted Mr. Bush temporary total disability benefits from February 4, 2016, through March 7, 2016.

Mr. Bush underwent a left shoulder MRI on February 22, 2016, which was interpreted as revealing permanent cystic changes at the anterior aspect of the greater tuberosity and imaging suggestive of subacromial impingement with fairly extensive rotator cuff tendinosis and multifocal partial tears, including a moderate to large under surface partial tear of the anterior to central supraspinatus tendon footprint; biceps tendinosis and imaging concern for proximal tendon rupture; and superior labral tear from anterior to posterior lesion and fraying of the anterior labrum. After reviewing the results of the MRI, Dr. Bal opined that his symptoms were coming from the post-traumatic labral tears and discussed surgical intervention, which would include a left shoulder scope and evaluation of the labral tears with possible labral repair, as well as possible biceps tendinosis. Dr. Bal stated that Mr. Bush would be in a brace post-operatively and unable to work for four or five months. Dr. Bal performed left shoulder arthroscopy with debridement on March 15, 2016, for the left shoulder superior labral tear.

Mr. Bush returned to Dr. Bal on June 30, 2016, for a follow-up evaluation. He was approximately three months post-left shoulder arthroscopy with debridement. Mr. Bush reported that he had been going to physical therapy, which he believed was helping his range of motion. Because Mr. Bush was still experiencing pain in his shoulder, Dr. Bal recommended an additional eight weeks of physical therapy. He provided Mr. Bush with a corticosteroid injection and recommended that he remain off work until September 1, 2016. When Mr. Bush returned to Dr. Bal on September 29, 2016, he was still experiencing mild discomfort and limitations with regard to internal and external rotation. Dr. Bal advised him to remain off work until November 13, 2016. Dr. Bal indicated by the time of his next appointment, Mr. Bush would more than likely have reached his maximum degree of medical improvement.

Mr. Bush underwent an independent medical evaluation by Dr. Soulsby on October 13, 2016. After examination, Dr. Soulsby diagnosed Mr. Bush as suffering from impingement syndrome with SLAP lesion and tear of the longhead of the biceps-left upper extremity. He believed that Mr. Bush had not reached his maximum degree of medical improvement and still had clear cut symptoms related to an insufficient anchor of the longhead of the biceps tendon. Dr. Soulsby recommended an arthroscopic release of the biceps tendon from the capsule and tenodesis.

2 He noted that after surgery Mr. Bush would require further physical therapy and rehabilitation, but he would be able to return to work within three months after surgery.

On November 14, 2016, Mr. Bush returned to Dr. Bal for a follow-up evaluation. He complained of anterior shoulder pain, difficulty with weight bearing away from his body or overhead, and an inability to sleep on his shoulder. Dr. Bal reviewed Dr. Soulsby’s report and recommended left shoulder arthroscopy with posterior capsule release and manipulation, as well as tenodesis if indicated at the time of surgery. Dr. Bal peformed left shoulder arthroscopy with lysis of adhesions and manipulation under anesthesia on February 8, 2017. Mr. Bush began post- operative therapy at Priority One Physical Therapy on February 10, 2017.

Mr. Bush saw Dr. Bal again on May 15, 2017. He reported that his pain level had decreased, and he was able to move his arm much better than prior to his second surgery. However, Mr. Bush did complain of rotation limitations. Dr. Bal found forward flexion to 175°, abduction to 100°, external rotation to 35° - 40°, internal rotation to the sacrum, and rotator cuff strength 4+/5 for external rotation and 5/5 for internal rotation. Dr. Bal ordered continued physical therapy to work on range of motion and strength.

Dr. Soulsby again examined Mr. Bush on May 18, 2017. Mr. Bush told Dr. Soulsby that he had improved in motion and strength, but he did not feel he was back to normal. He complained of weakness. Dr. Soulsby found mild atrophy in the supraspinatus and tenderness over the bicipital groove. Dr. Soulsby concluded that Mr. Bush had reached maximum medical improvement, but stated that he would benefit from some additional physical therapy and work conditioning. Dr. Soulsby indicated that he had reached a “stable plateau” and recommended 5% whole person impairment due to decreased flexion, abduction and internal rotation.

Mr.

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

Related

Allen v. Workers' Compensation Commissioner & Consolidation Coal Co.
314 S.E.2d 401 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Murray American Energy, Inc. v. Franklin Bush, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murray-american-energy-inc-v-franklin-bush-wva-2020.