State Ex Rel. Wyoming Workers' Safety & Compensation Division v. Carson
252 P.3d 929
Wyo.2011Background
- Carson was severely injured in a January 19, 2006 car accident; memory loss affected recall of events leading to the accident.
- Wife filed a Wyoming Report of Injury; Division denied workers' compensation benefits, concluding the injury did not arise out of and in the course of employment with Metrocities.
- Metrocities contested the Division's denial; OAH heard the case; Gunderson deposition presented, Reynolds deposition not taken, and no Reynolds testimony.
- OAH upheld the Division's denial on September 26, 2007; Carson did not appeal that decision.
- In May 2008, after federal court found Carson acted within the course and scope of employment, he moved to reopen under W.R.C.P. 60(b)(2), attaching a federal verdict form but not complete transcripts.
- Hearing examiner denied the motion to reopen on October 29, 2008, not considering the new federal evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court properly supplemented the record. | Carson: supplementation needed; evidence material and not previously available. | Division: district court abused discretion by supplementing without explicit findings of materiality/good cause. | Supplementation upheld; the evidence was material and good cause shown. |
| Whether the district court should have remanded to the OAH to consider the supplemented record. | Carson: remand unnecessary or harmless error should prevail. | Division: rule requires remand to agency to consider new evidence. | Remand to OAH required to consider supplemented record. |
| Whether the hearing examiner abused discretion in denying the Motion to Reopen Claim. | Carson: new evidence supports reopening under Rule 60(b). | Division: no abuse; record already denied previously. | Issue reserved pending remand; not decided in isolation from remand directive. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Harris, 900 P.2d 1163 (Wyo. 1995) (materiality standard for evidence in workers' compensation context)
- Louisiana Land & Exploration Co. v. Wyoming Oil & Gas Conservation Comm'n, 809 P.2d 775 (Wyo. 1991) (flexibility of W.R.A.P. 12.08 supplementation; balance with 60 procedures)
- Board of County Comm'rs v. Teton County Youth Servs., 652 P.2d 400 (Wyo. 1982) (purpose of full record development on administrative review)
- Glenn v. Board of County Comm'rs, 440 P.2d 1 (Wyo. 1968) (record development and agency review values)
- Frank v. State By & Through the Wyoming Bd. of Dental Exam'rs, 965 P.2d 674 (Wyo. 1998) (good cause for supplementation concept in administrative review)
- Andersen v. Hernandez, 122 P.3d 950 (Wyo. 2005) (de novo review standards for interpretation of court rules)
- Shryack, In re Worker's Compensation Claim, 3 P.3d 850 (Wyo. 2000) (abuse-of-discretion standard for record supplementation)