Bade-Brown v. Labor Commission
2016 UT App 65
| Utah Ct. App. | 2016Background
- In July 2007 Bade-Brown, test-driving an employer vehicle, was rear-ended and treated for head contusion, cervical/thoracic/lumbar strains, and chest contusion; she reported ongoing headaches and spine pain and ultimately had cervical surgery in April 2011.
- In November 2012 she sought temporary total disability (TTD) for April 13, 2011–April 11, 2012 and related benefits under Utah workers’ compensation.
- The ALJ referred medical issues to an independent medical panel; the panel concluded no medically demonstrable causal connection between the 2007 accident and petitioner’s current neck/back/headache complaints and set MMI at January 1, 2008.
- Petitioner objected to the panel report (challenging causation, the MMI date, and alleged panel-chair bias); the ALJ admitted the panel report and found no causal link and MMI before 2011, dismissing her claims for the 2011–2012 period.
- The Labor Commission affirmed the ALJ as to causation (finding substantial evidence supporting a non-work-related cause for petitioner’s current complaints) but rejected the panel’s specific January 2008 MMI date as unsupported; it nevertheless concluded MMI occurred before April 2011 based on other medical records.
- Petitioner sought judicial review, arguing (1) the panel report should have been excluded due to glaring deficiencies and (2) the Commission abused its discretion by refusing an objection hearing, including to investigate alleged bias of the panel chair.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the ALJ/Commission erred by admitting the medical panel report despite objections | Bade-Brown: report had glaring deficiencies (MMI error, unreliable relied-on records) making it inadmissible | Commission: report admissible; objections not well taken and Commission may rely on report plus other evidence | Denied—Commission did not abuse discretion; objections not well taken and report admissible |
| Whether denial of an objection hearing was an abuse of discretion | Bade-Brown: hearing required to cure glaring deficiencies and resolve conflicts | Commission: ALJ/Commission may deny hearing if reasonable basis exists; errors were not dispositive | Denied—record gave reasonable basis to deny hearing; panel MMI error was harmless given other evidence |
| Whether the panel’s MMI date error required exclusion of the panel report | Bade-Brown: MMI date (Jan 1, 2008) is unsupported and thus a glaring defect | Commission: it rejected the panel’s MMI date and relied on other substantial evidence showing MMI before April 2011 | Denied—MMI error was not material; other substantial evidence supported MMI before 2011 |
| Whether alleged bias by the medical panel chair required a hearing or exclusion | Bade-Brown: audit and prior cases show appearance of bias by panel chair warranting inquiry | Commission: allegations speculative, no specific evidence of bias in this case | Denied—allegations speculative; no evidence of actual bias; no abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Johnston v. Labor Comm’n, 307 P.3d 615 (Utah Ct. App. 2013) (framework for when objections to medical panel reports require an objection hearing)
- Borja v. Labor Comm’n, 327 P.3d 1223 (Utah Ct. App. 2014) (abuse-of-discretion standard for refusing to exclude medical panel reports)
- Moyes v. State, 699 P.2d 748 (Utah 1985) (Commission not required to adopt medical panel findings)
- Virgin v. Board of Review, 803 P.2d 1284 (Utah Ct. App. 1990) (Commission may give differing weight to parts of a medical panel report)
- Intermountain Health Care, Inc. v. Board of Review, 839 P.2d 841 (Utah Ct. App. 1992) (role of medical panel vs. Commission in resolving factual conflicts)
- Allen v. Industrial Comm’n, 729 P.2d 15 (Utah 1986) (claimant must prove medical causation by preponderance of the evidence)