Hutchings v. Labor Commission
2016 UT App 160
Utah Ct. App.2016Background
- In Aug. 2008 Hutchings (school cafeteria worker) felt sudden back pain after lifting heavy boxes at work; she did not miss work or immediately seek treatment for back pain.
- In Dec. 2008 Hutchings reported low‑back/radicular pain to her PCP; MRI showed multi‑level degenerative disc disease and other degenerative changes.
- Surgeons treated Hutchings (nerve‑root decompression, no disc surgery performed intraoperatively); she continued to have chronic back/leg symptoms and later sought fusion by 2012.
- Hutchings filed for workers’ compensation (permanent total disability) alleging the Aug. 2008 workplace accident caused or aggravated her low‑back condition.
- ALJ found a preexisting degenerative condition and applied the heightened legal‑causation standard, denying benefits for lack of an "unusual or extraordinary" exertion. The Commission disagreed on legal causation, remanded for a medical panel on medical causation.
- A unanimous impartial medical panel concluded the Aug. 2008 event did not medically cause or impair Hutchings’ low‑back condition, attributing her disability to preexisting degenerative disease; the ALJ and Labor Commission adopted that conclusion and denied benefits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Commission erred in its medical‑causation finding | Hutchings: medical panel failed to apply aggravation rule and ignored whether the accident aggravated her preexisting condition | Commission: panel and agency properly considered aggravation and whole medical history and found preexisting degeneration sole medical cause | Court: Commission correctly applied law; panel questions were proper and panel/Commission considered aggravation; no error |
| Whether the medical panel was improperly instructed re: aggravation test | Hutchings: ALJ’s instructions prevented panel from considering aggravation | Commission: instructions mirrored Allen test and asked panel to allocate impairment/limitations to the accident | Held: Instructions were adequate and required consideration of any portion of impairment attributable to the accident |
| Whether substantial evidence supports the Commission’s decision | Hutchings: contemporaneous symptoms, treatment, surgery and some doctors support aggravation by the accident | Commission: medical history, imaging, surgery findings, and panel opinion support degenerative cause | Held: Substantial evidence supports the Commission’s finding that degeneration, not the accident, medically caused her disability |
| Whether the Commission relied improperly on the panel report | Hutchings: Commission improperly adopted panel without probing its legal understanding | Commission: Commission is ultimate factfinder, may adopt or reject panel after reviewing all evidence | Held: No abuse—Commission properly evaluated and relied on panel and other medical evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Allen v. Industrial Comm’n, 729 P.2d 15 (Utah 1986) (distinguishes legal and medical causation and explains aggravation rule)
- Nyrehn v. Industrial Comm’n, 800 P.2d 330 (Utah Ct. App. 1990) (employer bears burden to show preexisting condition contributed to injury)
- Virgin v. Board of Review, 803 P.2d 1284 (Utah Ct. App. 1990) (preexisting condition that is sole medical cause bars compensation even if accident may have hastened surgery)
- Jensen v. United States Fuel Co., 424 P.2d 440 (Utah 1967) (medical panel provides medical diagnosis but Commission is ultimate factfinder)