Davies v. West Virginia Office of the Insurance Commissioner
227 W. Va. 330
| W. Va. | 2011Background
- Davies, a millwright for Al-can Rolled Products, developed right carpal tunnel syndrome linked to employment; claim ruled compensable on June 5, 2007.
- Davies underwent right carpal tunnel surgery on September 5, 2007 and returned to work November 19, 2007.
- Dr. Bachwitt evaluated Davies on January 3, 2008, determining a 6% whole-person impairment using AMA Guides Fourth, Table 16.
- Dr. Bachwitt applied W. Va.C.S.R. § 85-20-64.5, concluding 2% PPD based on a 0–6% per-hand range.
- OOJ reversed, granting a 6% PPD award based on Davies’ AMA impairment before applying § 64.5.
- Board of Review reinstated the 2% PPD award, reversing the OOJ.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity and application of § 85-20-64.5 to Table 16 | Davies contends § 85-20-64.5 must operate with AMA Table 16 impairment without creating absurd results. | Alcan argues § 64.5 permits mild/moderate/severe classifications producing 0–6% per hand after Table 16. | § 85-20-64.5 is invalid as applied to Table 16; cannot be used to cap Davies’ impairment. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bragg v. State Workmen’s Comp. Comm’r, 152 W. Va. 706 (1969) (standard of review for clearly wrong Board findings)
- Peters v. Rivers Edge Min., Inc., 224 W. Va. 160 (2009) (duty to avoid absurd constructions of statutes)
- State v. Kerns, 183 W. Va. 130 (1990) (absurdity doctrine and reasonable construction)
- Ohio Cnty. Comm’n v. Manchin, 171 W. Va. 552 (1983) (statutory interpretation requires determining legislative intent)
- Consumer Advocate Div. v. Public Serv. Comm’n, 182 W. Va. 152 (1989) (agency rules must faithfully reflect Legislature’s intent)
- Williamson v. Greene, 200 W. Va. 421 (1997) (interpretation principles for statutes and rules)