Ralph Filipek v. Alpha Natural Resources, Inc.

CourtWest Virginia Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 1, 2022
Docket20-0671
StatusPublished

This text of Ralph Filipek v. Alpha Natural Resources, Inc. (Ralph Filipek v. Alpha Natural Resources, Inc.) 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
Ralph Filipek v. Alpha Natural Resources, Inc., (W. Va. 2022).

Opinion

FILED February 1, 2022 EDYTHE NASH GAISER, CLERK SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA

STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA

SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS

RALPH FILIPEK, Claimant Below, Petitioner

vs.) No. 20-0671 (BOR Appeal No. 2055250) (Claim No. 2014020373)

ALPHA NATURAL RESOURCES, INC., Employer Below, Respondent

MEMORANDUM DECISION Petitioner Ralph Filipek, by Counsel Lori J. Withrow, appeals the decision of the West Virginia Workers’ Compensation Board of Review (“Board of Review”). Alpha Natural Resources, Inc., by Counsel Charity K. Lawrence, filed a timely response.

The issue on appeal is medical benefits. The claims administrator denied a request for a lumbar MRI, a referral to Andrew Thymius, M.D., and lumbar spine physical therapy on November 14, 2018. The Workers’ Compensation Office of Judges (“Office of Judges”) affirmed the decision in its March 13, 2020, Order. The Order was affirmed by the Board of Review on August 6, 2020.

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:

(b) 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.

1 (c) 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 re- weighing 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. Filipek, a coal miner, fell at work on January 9, 2014, and injured his lower back. Mr. Filipek had previous lower back issues. A lumbar MRI was performed on February 21, 2012, and showed a disc protrusion at L3-4 with stenosis, a large L4-5 disc protrusion with severe stenosis, disc space narrowing from L3-L5, and disc degeneration. In a March 21, 2012, treatment note, Rajesh Patel, M.D., diagnosed L4-5 disc herniation, lumbar degenerative disc disease, lumbago, L3-4 disc protrusion, and mild scoliosis with collapse at L4-5. Dr. Patel recommended Mr. Filipek try injections and physical therapy rather than surgery. A lumbar x-ray showed degenerative changes with mild collapse at L4-5 on March 23, 2012. There was no instability.

The day after his compensable injury, Mr. Filipek sought treatment at Raleigh General Hospital Emergency Department. A CT scan showed an L3-4 disc herniation, degenerative disc disease with disc space narrowing, an L4-5 disc herniation, and bilateral stenosis. Mr. Filipek was diagnosed with chronic lumbar disc herniation. The Employees’ and Physicians’ Report of Injury, completed on January 13, 2014, indicates Mr. Filipek injured his lower back when he fell at work. The physician’s section was completed by Raleigh General Hospital and indicates Mr. Filipek developed lumbar neuroforaminal impingement due to his work injury.

In a January 15, 2014, treatment note, Dr. Patel noted that Mr. Filipek had been in severe pain since his fall at work. Neither injections nor chiropractic treatment were helpful. Dr. Patel diagnosed lumbar sprain, L3-4 disc herniation, L4-5 disc herniation, and lumbar radiculitis. Dr. Patel opined that the L3-4 disc herniation was not present on the preinjury MRI and was the result of the compensable injury. He recommended physical therapy and injections. It was noted that surgery may be necessary. A lumbar MRI showed a large L3-4 disc protrusion causing moderate effacement of the thecal sac and lateral recess narrowing, effacement of the L3 nerve root, and an L4-5 disc protrusion with effacement of the L4 nerve root on January 20, 2014.

On January 22, 2014, Dr. Patel noted that Mr. Filipek reported severe lower back pain with any kind of activity. It was noted that an MRI showed a new disc herniation at L3-4. The diagnoses remained unchanged. Therapy and injections were recommended. The claim was held

2 compensable for lumbar sprain/strain on February 3, 2014. Mr. Filipek underwent transforaminal epidural injections from L2-3 to L4-5 on February 6, 2014.

Mr. Filipek returned to Dr. Patel on February 24, 2014, and reported that his leg pain had improved. He still had pain in his lower back. Dr. Patel stated that surgery would be a last resort. On March 26, 2014, Dr. Patel noted that Mr. Filipek was doing better overall. The diagnoses were lumbago, lumbar disc herniation, lumbar sprain, and lumbar radiculitis. Mr. Filipek stated that he felt well enough to return to work. Mr. Filipek returned on April 2, 2014, and stated that he had an episode of pain since his last visit that required an emergency room visit. Mr. Filipek stated that he felt pain in his right paraspinal area after physical therapy. The diagnoses were lumbar sprain, thoracic sprain, lumbar disc herniation, lumbar degenerative disc disease, and nephrolithiasis. Dr. Patel noted that the pain could have been the result of a thoracic sprain due to physical therapy or a kidney stone. On April 28, 2014, Mr. Filipek stated that he was back to work and had very little pain.

Paul Bachwitt, M.D., performed an Independent Medical Evaluation on May 27, 2014, in which he noted that the claim was compensable for lumbar sprain. He opined that Mr. Filipek’s sprain was superimposed on preexisting lumbar degenerative changes. Mr. Filipek had reached maximum medical improvement. Dr. Bachwitt found no clinical signs of radiculopathy on examination. He assessed 8% impairment.

In a June 4, 2014, treatment note, Dr. Patel noted that Mr. Filipek was doing well with just slight discomfort. He had stopped taking all of his medications and was back to his regular job duties with little difficulty. Dr. Patel diagnosed annular tear, herniated L3-4 disc, herniated L4-5 disc, lumbar radiculitis, and lumbar sprain. Mr. Filipek returned on December 8, 2014. It was noted that he had low back pain for four years. Mr. Filipek reported a flair-up of pain a few weeks prior, but it had since resolved. On February 9, 2015, Mr. Filipek reported that his pain had worsened. Dr.

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

Related

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)
Ralph Filipek v. Alpha Natural Resources, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ralph-filipek-v-alpha-natural-resources-inc-wva-2022.