Constellium Rolled Products v. Denny Myers
20-0281
| W. Va. | Jun 23, 2021Background
- Denny Myers, an assistant mill operator, slipped/exited a cart on June 29, 2018; he reported his heel slipped, his knee twisted and popped, and he sought treatment the next day.
- Emergency and treating physician records diagnosed right knee internal derangement, primary osteoarthritis, and MRI (7/27/2018) showed a complex medial meniscus tear and possible lateral meniscal tears.
- Claims administrator rejected the claim on August 7, 2018; Myers had right knee arthroscopic partial medial meniscectomy and chondroplasty on September 17, 2018.
- Office of Judges (Sept. 6, 2019) affirmed rejection, relying on surveillance video that did not show a slip, the absence of testimony from the purported witness, and preexisting osteoarthritis as the likely cause of symptoms.
- Board of Review reversed (Feb. 25, 2020), finding Myers’s account and medical opinions reliable, noting the video lacked the critical angle, and remanded to allow submission of additional evidence and to identify compensable conditions.
- Supreme Court affirmed the Board: video did not disprove the injury, the medical record and consistent account supported compensability by a preponderance of the evidence, and remand for specific compensable conditions was appropriate.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Myers sustained a compensable right‑knee injury arising in course of employment | Myers: slipped/exited cart at work, immediate pain, consistent reports, medical diagnosis and MRI support work injury | Employer: surveillance video shows no slip, witness not presented, preexisting osteoarthritis explains MRI/symptoms | Court affirmed Board: preponderance of evidence supports that an injury occurred at work; claim compensable and remanded to define compensable conditions |
| Whether Board’s reversal of Office of Judges was permissible under standards of review | Myers: medical opinions and contemporaneous reports are reliable; Board entitled to deferential review | Employer: Office of Judges correctly weighed video and preexisting condition; Board reversal was erroneous | Court: applied deferential standard to Board; found no clear error and upheld Board’s remand and conclusions |
Key Cases Cited
- Hammons v. W. Va. Off. of Ins. Comm’r, 235 W. Va. 577, 775 S.E.2d 458 (2015) (standard of review and deference to Board of Review decisions)
- Justice v. W. Va. Office Ins. Comm’n, 230 W. Va. 80, 736 S.E.2d 80 (2012) (de novo review for questions of law arising from Board decisions)
- Davies v. W. Va. Off. of Ins. Comm’r, 227 W. Va. 330, 708 S.E.2d 524 (2011) (discussion of appellate review standards in workers’ compensation appeals)
- Barnett v. State Workmen’s Comp. Comm’r, 153 W. Va. 796, 172 S.E.2d 698 (1970) (an injury is compensable if received in course of and resulting from employment)