Rosa Chavez v. MS Technology LLC and Westfield Insurance Company, 972 N.W.2d 662

Rosa Chavez injured her right shoulder at work (mopping) on Feb 5, 2018; MRI and surgery showed a full-thickness rotator cuff tear retracted to the glenoid, severe AC arthrosis, biceps tendon tearing, and related shoulder pathology.
Treating surgeon (Dr. Peterson) rated a 6% right upper-extremity impairment; independent evaluator (Dr. Bansal) rated a 10% upper-extremity impairment (equal to 6% body-as-a-whole) and treated the problem as a right shoulder injury.
Chavez filed for workers’ compensation claiming injuries to her right shoulder, neck, and right upper extremity and sought industrial (unscheduled whole-body) disability benefits rather than scheduled shoulder benefits.
The deputy commissioner initially treated the injury as unscheduled, but the commissioner reversed, holding the rotator cuff injury is a scheduled shoulder injury under the 2017 amendment to Iowa Code § 85.34(2)(n); the district court affirmed and the Supreme Court retained the appeal.
The central legal question was how to define “shoulder” in § 85.34(2)(n): narrowly as only the glenohumeral joint (Chavez) or functionally to include the joint plus the muscles, tendons, and ligaments (employers and commissioner).
The commissioner also found Chavez failed to prove any separate, permanent arm impairment from the biceps tear, so she could not obtain industrial benefits based on simultaneous arm and shoulder losses.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Definition of “shoulder” under Iowa Code § 85.34(2)(n)	Chavez: “shoulder” means only the glenohumeral joint; rotator cuff injury is not a scheduled shoulder injury (so it’s unscheduled whole-body)	Appellees/Commissioner: “shoulder” should be read functionally to include the glenohumeral joint plus muscles, tendons, ligaments (including rotator cuff)	Court: statute ambiguous; apply construction rules and legislative context; “shoulder” defined functionally to include rotator cuff and related structures; rotator cuff injury is a scheduled shoulder injury
Entitlement to industrial (whole-body) disability because of simultaneous shoulder and arm injury	Chavez: alternatively argues she injured both shoulder and arm and thus should get industrial benefits	Appellees: Chavez did not prove a permanent arm impairment; evidence supports only a shoulder impairment	Court: substantial evidence supports commissioner’s finding Chavez failed to prove permanent arm impairment; no industrial benefits; award limited to scheduled shoulder compensation

Brewer-Strong v. HNI Corp., 913 N.W.2d 235 (Iowa 2018) (agency deference and interpretation of chapter 85)
Gumm v. Easter Seal Soc. of Iowa, Inc., 943 N.W.2d 23 (Iowa 2020) (accept factual findings supported by substantial evidence)
Floyd v. Quaker Oats, 646 N.W.2d 105 (Iowa 2002) (distinguishing scheduled vs. unscheduled compensation)
Second Inj. Fund of Iowa v. Nelson, 544 N.W.2d 258 (Iowa 1996) (construction of the scheduled-benefits scheme)
Holstein Elec. v. Breyfogle, 756 N.W.2d 812 (Iowa 2008) (statutory ambiguity standard)
Colwell v. Iowa Dep’t of Hum. Servs., 923 N.W.2d 225 (Iowa 2019) (presumption that legislative amendment changes the law)
Xenia Rural Water Dist. v. Vegors, 786 N.W.2d 250 (Iowa 2010) (burden of proof for permanent partial disability)