Davenport v. Workforce Safety & Insurance Fund
2013 ND 118
| N.D. | 2013Background
- Davenport, a truck driver, sustained a September 9, 2010 chest contusion and rib fracture at work, with WSI accepting benefits.
- On December 24, 2010, he injured his neck and left shoulder; WSI granted benefits for neck/shoulder and upper back sprains.
- Davenport later sought treatment for anxiety and depression beginning February 2011, claiming it was caused by work injuries and the modified duties context.
- Medical evidence showed preexisting degenerative disc disease and longstanding back pain; independent examiners questioned causal links to the December 2010 injury.
- ALJ concluded Davenport failed to prove a compensable injury under statute, with evidence showing preexisting conditions and no substantial aggravation or acceleration from the work injuries.
- District court affirmed the ALJ; the Supreme Court reviews agency decisions under limited, deferential standards.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the anxiety/depression compensable as a mental injury caused by a physical injury? | Davenport's anxiety/depression was caused by his work injuries and stress related to modified duties. | The medical evidence does not show the physical injury caused at least 50% of the anxiety/depression relative to other causes. | Not compensable; not established 50% causation. |
| Are the cervical spine and left shoulder injuries compensable as a substantial aggravation of a preexisting condition? | Work injuries substantially aggravated or worsened preexisting cervical spine/shoulder conditions. | Evidence showed preexisting degenerative disease and no substantial acceleration or worsening due to the work injuries. | Not compensable; no substantial aggravation or acceleration. |
| Did the ALJ's findings and the agency's rationale meet the burden of proof under the law? | Record support shows work injuries caused the claimed conditions. | Record supports lack of substantial causation and proper application of Mickelson framework. | Yes; the ALJ's findings were supported by the weight of the evidence. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bergum v. Workforce Safety & Ins., 2009 ND 52 (2009) (medical-evidence standard for compensable injury)
- Bruder v. Workforce Safety & Ins., 2009 ND 23 (2009) (substantial contributing factor causation standard)
- Rush v. North Dakota Workers Comp. Bureau, 2002 ND 129 (2002) (speculation insufficient for causation)
- Aga v. Workforce Safety & Ins., 2006 ND 254 (2006) (record to support causation burden)
- Mickelson v. Workforce Safety & Ins., 2012 ND 164 (2012) (pain can be symptom or substantial aggravation; requires objective evidence)
- Workforce Safety & Ins. v. Auck, 2010 ND 126 (2010) (deferential review of ALJ factual findings)