Fogleman v. Labor Commission
2015 UT App 294
Utah Ct. App.2015Background
- Fogleman fell while delivering mail at Kolob Care and Rehabilitation Centers, injuring hands, knee, and hip; she contends the stepping stone instability caused the Work Accident.
- Initial treatment reduced hand pain; knee and hip pain persisted with no objective knee joint injury on MRI.
- A medical panel found a two percent whole-person impairment and causal links between the Work Accident and knee/hand/hip injuries, but no link to back pain.
- An ALJ granted temporary total disability and partial disability for work-accident impairments and awarded medical costs related to hand/hip injuries, but denied permanent total disability.
- The Board affirmed, restricting the significant-impairment analysis to work-accident impairments and held the impairment did not reach the threshold for permanent total disability; it also rejected compensating anxiety/depression treatment as unrelated to the Work Accident.
- Fogleman seeks review of the Board’s denial of permanent total disability and its handling of related medical-care issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Significant-impairment standard application | Fogleman argues Board misinterpreted 34A-2-413(1)(b)(i) by ignoring non-work impairments. | Board properly limited analysis to impairments caused by the Work Accident per the statute. | Board correctly applied the statute; non-work impairments were not included. |
| Two percent impairment as significant | Two percent is enough to constitute a significant impairment in some cases. | Two percent does not meet the significant-impairment threshold given record evidence. | Two percent impairment did not establis h a significant impairment; substantial evidence supports denial. |
| Liberal construction and benefit of the doubt | Act should be liberally construed in favor of benefits, with doubts resolved for employee. | Employer/board must still prove all statutory elements by a preponderance of the evidence. | Burden on employee required by statute; no credible tie to entitlement based on the evidence. |
| Anxiety/depression medical care | Board should award ongoing treatment for industrially compounded anxiety/depression. | Medical panel found anxiety/depression not medically caused by Work Accident; no award. | No award for anxiety/depression; Board’s remedy for future care limited to work injuries. |
| Odd-lot doctrine applicability | Odd-lot doctrine could support entitlement despite low impairment. | Inapplicable absent showing of significant impairment. | Odd-lot doctrine not triggered because no significant impairment established. |
Key Cases Cited
- Provo City v. Labor Comm’n, 2015 UT 32 (Utah 2015) (substantial-evidence review of significant impairment standard)
- Murray v. Labor Comm’n, 2012 UT 39 (Utah 2012) (liberal-construction principle; burden on employee to prove elements)
- Jex v. Labor Comm’n, 2013 UT 40 (Utah 2013) (benefit-of-the-doubt principle at issue after assessment of facts)
- Clawson v. Labor Comm’n, 2013 UT App 123 (Utah App. 2013) (disregarding preexisting conditions not causally related to work accident in PTD analysis)
- Hardman v. Salt Lake City Fleet Mgmt., 725 P.2d 1323 (Utah 1986) (pre-significant-impairment-era decisions discussed for context)