Foye v. Labor Commission
2018 UT App 124
Utah Ct. App.2018Background
- Timothy Foye, a truck driver, claimed permanent brain injury from carbon monoxide exposure during a 2013 work incident and sought workers’ compensation benefits.
- Treating physicians offered conflicting opinions: some diagnosed CO poisoning and permanent brain injury; others (including Kodiak’s examiners) found no causal link and suggested psychiatric causes.
- ALJ referred the case to a medical panel (chair Dr. Biggs, family medicine/occupational experience; Dr. Watkins, neurologist). The panel concluded no permanent neurological injury from CO exposure and attributed symptoms to psychiatric disease.
- Foye objected, arguing the panelists lacked requisite specialty (treatment of CO poisoning or pseudo-dementia/neuropsychological conditions) as required by Utah Code § 34A-2-601; the ALJ admitted the panel report and the Board affirmed without documentary proof of specialties.
- Foye also argued Utah Admin. Code R602-2-1(F)(3) (allowing respondents to require employee exams by employer-chosen physicians) is an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority; the Board rejected that claim.
- Court of Appeals held the Board abused its discretion in overruling Foye’s objections to the panelists’ qualifications (ordering a new qualified panel) but rejected the nondelegation challenge to the rule.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Board abused its discretion by admitting the medical panel report when panelists lacked required specialty | Foye: panelists were not physicians "specializing in the treatment of the disease or condition involved" (CO poisoning / pseudo-dementia) under § 34A-2-601, so report should be excluded | Board/Respondents: panelists (occupational medicine/family med and neurology) were qualified to address neurological/cognitive causation; ALJ properly relied on panel | Held: Board abused its discretion. No record evidence showed panelists specialized in the identified conditions; admission was not harmless. Court ordered a new panel with qualified specialists. |
| Whether Foye was substantially prejudiced by admission of the panel report | Foye: admission of an unqualified panel’s report affected outcome because ALJ and Board relied on it to deny benefits | Respondents: panel report was persuasive and consistent with other evidence; any errors were harmless | Held: Prejudice established. Panel defect was fundamental and non-harmless given reliance on its causation conclusions. |
| Whether ALJ/Board decision-making process (ex parte communications, bias, instruction pamphlet) required reversal | Foye: alleged ex parte contacts and biased procedures surrounding the specific panel undermined process | Respondents: procedural conduct did not require relief; issues relate to the specific panel now set aside | Held: Court did not reach these claims on the merits because it set aside the decision based on panel qualifications. |
| Whether rule R602-2-1(F)(3) unconstitutionally delegates legislative power by letting employers require employee exams | Foye: rule delegates Commission’s authority to private employers/insurers and invades employee privacy; Revne analogous | Respondents: rule is within Commission’s delegated rulemaking authority under § 34A-2-602(1) and does not strip Commission oversight or discretion | Held: Rule is not an unconstitutional delegation; Court rejects Foye’s nondelegation challenge. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bade-Brown v. Labor Comm’n, 372 P.3d 44 (Utah Ct. App. 2016) (standard for reviewing refusal to exclude medical panel report)
- Danny’s Drywall v. Labor Comm’n, 339 P.3d 624 (Utah Ct. App. 2014) (deference to agency factual findings; role of medical panels)
- Hutchings v. Labor Comm’n, 378 P.3d 1273 (Utah Ct. App. 2016) (substantial evidence standard)
- Petersen v. Utah Labor Comm’n, 416 P.3d 583 (Utah 2017) (harmless-error and substantial prejudice framework for administrative appeals)
- Friends of Great Salt Lake v. Utah Dep’t of Nat. Res., 393 P.3d 291 (Utah 2017) (construing "shall" in statutes as mandatory)
- Revne v. Trade Comm’n, 192 P.2d 563 (Utah 1948) (constitutional delegation precedent relied on by petitioner)
- Edwards v. Tillery, 671 P.2d 195 (Utah 1983) (physician qualification under medical panel statute)
- Zimmerman v. Industrial Comm’n, 785 P.2d 1127 (Utah Ct. App. 1989) (medical panelist specialization analysis)
- Right Way Trucking, LLC v. Labor Comm’n, 357 P.3d 1024 (Utah Ct. App. 2015) (ALJ discretion to admit panel reports or hold objection hearings)