The Waldinger Corporation, Emcasco Insurance Company, and Second Injury Fund of Iowa v. Michael B. Mettler
2012 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 77
| Iowa | 2012Background
- Mettler suffered a work-related right ankle injury in 2001 with multiple surgeries; MMI was reached in 2005.
- He returned to work after 2002 surgery, with later symptoms prompting a third ankle surgery in 2007.
- Healing period benefits were awarded for the 2007 postoperative convalescence (Sept 18–Dec 7, 2007).
- The district court affirmed healing period benefits and industrial disability; the court of appeals reversed on the healing period issue.
- The question on appeal is whether Iowa Code 85.34(1) allows a new healing period after MMI following subsequent surgery.
- This case focuses on interpretation of a healing-period remedy under the workers’ compensation statute.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the commissioner has interpretive authority for 85.34(1) | Mettler: agency can interpret 85.34(1) | Waldinger: no explicit vesting of interpretive authority | No clear vesting; review errors at law |
| Whether a new healing period can begin after MMI | Mettler: new healing period allowed after new disability | Waldinger: no new healing period post-MMI | Yes, a new healing period can begin after a new disability period |
| Interpretation of the phrase 'a healing period' and 'return to work' | Mettler: 'a' means any healing period during injury | Waldinger: limits to a single period per injury | 'A' interpreted as 'any' healing period; multiple periods possible |
| Effect of prior MMI date on subsequent healing period | Recent surgery can trigger healing period despite prior MMI | MJ: once MMI reached, no further healing period | A new healing period can occur after subsequent surgery and temporary disability |
| Record support for anticipated improvement from 2007 surgery | Record supports ongoing medical treatment yielding disability | Record insufficient to show anticipated improvement | Not necessary to resolve; holding based on new healing period |
Key Cases Cited
- Ellingson v. Fleetguard, Inc., 599 N.W.2d 440 (Iowa 1999) (limits on post-MMI healing-period recovery overturned)
- Renda v. Iowa Civil Rights Comm’n, 784 N.W.2d 8 (Iowa 2010) (governs deferential treatment of agency interpretations)
- NextEra Energy Res., LLC v. Iowa Utils. Bd., 815 N.W.2d 30 (Iowa 2012) (application of Renda framework to agency interpretations)
- City of Marion v. Iowa Dep’t of Revenue & Fin., 643 N.W.2d 205 (Iowa 2002) (agency interpretive authority considerations)
- Iowa Land Title Ass’n v. Iowa Fin. Auth., 771 N.W.2d 399 (Iowa 2009) (scope of legislative delegation for interpretation)
- Barton v. Nevada Poultry Co., 253 Iowa 285 (Iowa 1961) (liberal construction principle for workers’ compensation)
- Office of Consumer Advocate v. Iowa Utils. Board, 744 N.W.2d 640 (Iowa 2008) (agency interpretive authority context in regulatory provisions)