Dwyer v. Federal Express Corp.
353 S.W.3d 392
| Mo. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Claimant Dwyer, FedEx courier, sustained February 2001 work injury while pushing a large container; two wheels broke, causing a knee/back injury and severe pain.
- Claimant underwent MRI, physical therapy, injections, and other treatment; released to work by treating neurosurgeon Dr. Yingling in July 2001 despite pain.
- Claimant continued to experience severe pain after returning to work and took substantial leave in 2002; pain worsened.
- May 6, 2002, Claimant suffered a home back incident while at his computer, reported to supervisor, and subsequently underwent surgical intervention (May 2002 bilateral L3-L4 decompression and discectomy).
- Postoperative course included additional injections, two rhizotomies, dorsal column stimulator, and ongoing medications with substantial pain through 2010 hearing; Claimant’s post-2001 medical condition and need for treatment were contested as causally related to the 2001 work injury.
- The Commission concluded the work injury was a substantial factor in the post-2001 medical condition and disability, contrary to the ALJ, leading to affirmance of the award against Employer.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is Claimant's post-2001 medical condition causally related to the 2001 work injury? | Dwyer’s doctors tied May 2002 needs to the February 2001 injury. | Employer’s experts tied May 2002 issues to a non-work incident or unrelated factors. | Yes; Commission’s causation finding supported by competent evidence. |
| Should appellate review defer to Commission on medical credibility determinations? | Commission properly credited Claimant’s treating physician over Employer’s experts. | This court should reweigh witness credibility. | Appellate review deferential; credibility determinations binding if supported by evidence. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gregory v. Detroit Tool & Eng'g, 266 S.W.3d 844 (Mo.App.2008) (defers to Commission on witness credibility and medical causation findings when supported by substantial evidence)
- Proffer v. Federal Mogul Corp., 341 S.W.3d 184 (Mo.App.2011) (limits appellate review to legal questions; deference to Commission’s weighing of evidence)