495 P.3d 228
Utah Ct. App.2021Background
- Jose Torres, a long‑time printing press operator, suffered a compensable workplace back injury in 2011 (L4‑5 and L5‑S1 disc pathology), had surgery and returned to work with permanent restrictions.
- In 2013 Torres experienced a work‑related exacerbation; his surgeon recommended possible further surgery and initially limited duty to four hours/day and very low lifting; Company‑hired physician later opined Torres was medically stable and could work with 20/35 lb lifting limits.
- In March 2014 the Company offered a temporary light‑duty job that complied with the Company physician’s lifting restrictions but involved shifts of up to 12 hours; Torres declined, citing his surgeon’s restrictions and need for possible surgery.
- The ALJ referred disputed medical issues to a medical panel (First Panel); that panel took 17 months to report, concluded the 2013 event was a new unrelated injury, and then was slow to answer follow‑up questions; its members later retired and were unavailable to clarify.
- The ALJ appointed a Second Panel, which concluded the 2013 exacerbation was a permanent aggravation of the 2011 injury and that Torres could work with accommodations (e.g., eight‑hour shifts, limited lifting, position changes); the ALJ found Torres reasonably refused the 12‑hour light‑duty offer and awarded temporary total disability benefits.
- The Utah Labor Commission affirmed; the Company appealed, challenging (1) appointment of the Second Panel and (2) the Commission’s finding that Torres reasonably refused light duty.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ALJ/Commission abused discretion by appointing a second medical panel | Company: statute limits referral to “a medical panel,” so appointing a second panel was unauthorized and done to obtain a favorable opinion | Labor Commission/Torres: statute vests discretion to refer medical issues; First Panel was unresponsive, slow, and its members retired, so a new panel was reasonable | Court: No abuse of discretion — statute allows discretionary referrals, second panel justified by delays, incomplete First Panel reports, and retirements |
| Whether Torres reasonably refused Company’s light‑duty offer | Company: job met Company physician’s restrictions (20/35 lb) so refusal was unreasonable and bars temporary benefits | Torres: relied on treating surgeon’s more restrictive advice, the job was temporary and required 12‑hr shifts, and surgery/longer term prognosis made refusal reasonable | Court: Substantial evidence supports finding refusal reasonable (treating physician’s advice and 12‑hr shifts support refusal) |
Key Cases Cited
- Murray v. Utah Labor Comm’n, 308 P.3d 461 (Utah 2013) (distinguishes agency discretion from appellate deference and frames abuse‑of‑discretion review)
- Foye v. Labor Comm’n, 428 P.3d 26 (Utah Ct. App. 2018) (statute grants ALJ discretion to appoint medical panels)
- Ernest Health, Inc. v. Labor Comm’n, 369 P.3d 462 (Utah Ct. App. 2016) (referral to medical panel is generally discretionary)
- Provo City v. Utah Labor Comm’n, 345 P.3d 1242 (Utah 2015) (standard for reviewing administrative factual findings: substantial evidence)
- Stampin’ Up, Inc. v. Labor Comm’n, 256 P.3d 250 (Utah Ct. App. 2011) (employee cannot decline light duty for personal reasons and still collect temporary benefits)
- Brown & Root Indus. Serv. v. Industrial Comm’n, 947 P.2d 671 (Utah 1997) (Commission’s rule may limit but does not eliminate discretion to refer to medical panels)
- Price River Coal Co. v. Industrial Comm’n, 731 P.2d 1079 (Utah 1986) (medical panels serve an advisory role to assist the Commission)