Clawson v. Labor Commission, Division of Adjudication
2013 UT App 123
Utah Ct. App.2013Background
- Petitioner Randy James Clawson seeks review of a Utah Labor Commission Appeals Board decision denying permanent total disability benefits.
- Clawson worked at Star Foundry for over 30 years, exposed to silica dust, and was diagnosed with silicosis from work exposure.
- He also has a long smoking history with chronic bronchitis/COPD, which doctors attributed to smoking rather than silicosis for his current symptoms.
- A medical panel split on whether silicosis caused his initial symptoms; it agreed he should avoid silica exposure, but differed on current severity and causation of symptoms.
- The ALJ awarded benefits based on silicosis rendering him unable to work; the Board reversed, denying benefits, and the Utah Court vacated and remanded to reconsider whether silicosis itself can sustain permanent total disability independence from smoking-related symptoms.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is silicosis a significant impairment under § 34A-2-413(1)(b)(i)? | Clawson's silicosis is progressive and should be treated as a significant impairment. | Board concluded silicosis is not a significant impairment since it lacks current clinically significant pulmonary problems. | Remanded to reconsider significance of silicosis as a progressive impairment. |
| Can silicosis be the direct cause of permanent total disability independent of smoking-related symptoms? | Silicosis, by requiring removal from silica exposure, can directly disable him from working. | Current symptoms (lightheadedness, syncope, shortness of breath) are due to COPD from smoking; silicosis did not cause those symptoms. | Remanded to evaluate whether silicosis directly causes PTD given exposure limitations. |
| Did the Board fail to address whether silicosis provides an independent basis for PTD and the ability-to-work analysis? | Board erred by focusing solely on COPD/symptoms and ignoring silicosis as an independent disability basis. | Board properly relied on medical panel; but did not decide ability-to-work aspects. | Remanded for Board to consider silicosis as an independent basis for disability and related work-capacity analysis. |
Key Cases Cited
- Martinez v. Media–Paymaster Plus/Church of Jesus Christ of Latter‑day Saints, 164 P.3d 384 (2007 UT) (statutory factors and substantial evidence review in PTD determinations)
- Peterson Hunting v. Labor Comm’n, 269 P.3d 998 (2012 UT App) (reasonableness and deference in agency fact-finding on ability to perform work)
- LPI Servs. v. McGee, 215 P.3d 135 (2009 UT) (agency discretion to interpret statute when statutory language grants interpretation latitude)
- State v. Sellers, 248 P.3d 70 (2011 UT App) (guidance on remand to address recurring issues in trial context)