Daniel v. constar/depositors
1 CA-IC 16-0007
| Ariz. Ct. App. | Oct 27, 2016Background
- Amal Daniel, a Constar Financial collections clerk, slipped and injured her lower back at work on April 8, 2014; diagnosed with lower back strain and released with restrictions.
- She worked briefly, took extended medical leave, and reported ongoing constant lower back and radiating leg pain after treatment and physical therapy.
- Carrier closed the claim as medically stationary (effective May 12, 2014) and without permanent disability (closure dated September 11, 2014); Daniel protested and an ICA hearing was held.
- At the ALJ hearing, two independent medical examiners testified: Dr. Salyer (reviewed prior records and MRIs) concluded Daniel was medically stationary with no permanent impairment attributable to the industrial injury; Dr. Lieberman testified the accident may have aggravated a preexisting condition and recommended further treatment.
- The ALJ credited Dr. Salyer, found Daniel medically stationary as of September 11, 2014, awarded medical and limited temporary disability benefits, and denied permanent impairment. The ICA affirmed; Daniel sought special action review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ALJ erred in finding Daniel medically stationary with no permanent impairment | Daniel: ALJ failed to consider all relevant evidence and new medical records showing ongoing impairment and time off work | ICA/Employer: ALJ considered timely evidence; new records submitted on review were untimely and inadmissible; ALJ properly resolved conflicting expert testimony in favor of Dr. Salyer | Affirmed — ALJ’s finding of medical stationarity and no permanent impairment supported by competent evidence and proper resolution of expert conflict |
| Admissibility of medical records submitted with request for review | Daniel: those records were necessary and should have been considered | ICA/Employer: records were untimely; rule and precedent bar post-hearing evidence without continuance | Affirmed — court refused to consider untimely records under Epstein and applicable rules |
| Weight to give competing expert testimony | Daniel: Dr. Lieberman’s opinion should control; Salyer’s preexisting-injury conclusion was incorrect | ICA/Employer: ALJ entitled to weigh and prefer Salyer’s testimony after cross-examination and review | Affirmed — ALJ properly resolved the conflict and relied on Salyer’s testimony as "more probably correct" |
| Standard of review for ICA factual findings | Daniel: (implied) ALJ’s factual findings unsupported | ICA/Employer: appellate review defers to ALJ; view evidence in light most favorable to award | Applied — appellate court deferred to ALJ’s factual findings and found no abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Young v. Industrial Commission, 204 Ariz. 267 (App. 2003) (appellate deference to ALJ factual findings)
- Lovitch v. Industrial Commission, 202 Ariz. 102 (App. 2002) (same)
- Epstein v. Industrial Commission, 154 Ariz. 189 (App. 1987) (post-hearing evidence generally not considered)
- Perry v. Industrial Commission, 112 Ariz. 397 (1975) (presumption that ALJ considered all timely evidence)
- Fry’s Food Stores v. Industrial Commission, 161 Ariz. 119 (1989) (ALJ resolves conflicts in expert testimony)
- Kaibab Industries v. Industrial Commission, 196 Ariz. 601 (App. 2000) (ALJ authority to weigh medical evidence)
- Carousel Snack Bar v. Industrial Commission, 156 Ariz. 43 (1988) (consideration of expert qualifications and testimony)
- Condos v. Industrial Commission, 92 Ariz. 299 (1962) (findings supported when ALJ resolves evidentiary conflicts)