Thomas Charles v. Kamco Transport, Inc., 20-0277

Thomas Charles suffered a 2001 workplace injury (tire explosion) compensable for neck sprain, head injury, shoulder contusion, and post‑concussion syndrome.
He developed chronic neck, low back, and hip pain; in 2018 treating providers sought Robaxin and sacroiliac (SI) nerve blocks. Dr. Ozturk diagnosed SI joint dysfunction and myofascial pain syndrome.
The claims administrator denied Robaxin (June 20, 2018) and SI nerve blocks (August 1, 2018).
The Office of Judges reversed the Robaxin denial but affirmed the denial of SI injections (Oct. 4, 2019); the Board of Review affirmed (Feb. 28, 2020).
On appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeals the only issue was the denial of sacroiliac joint injections; the Court affirmed the Board, concluding the injections were not medically necessary for a compensable condition.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether sacroiliac joint injections are medically necessary and reasonably required for a compensable injury	Charles: SI nerve blocks are necessary to treat SI joint dysfunction/myofascial pain arising from the 2001 work injury	Commissioner/claims admin: SI dysfunction and myofascial pain syndrome are not compensable here; injections therefore not medically necessary	Affirmed denial: claimant failed to show by a preponderance that SI injections were medically necessary for a compensable condition; the underlying diagnoses are not compensable in this claim

Hammons v. W. Va. Off. of Ins. Comm'r, 235 W. Va. 577 (2015) (articulates workers' comp appellate standard of review and deference to board findings)
Justice v. West Virginia Office Insurance Commission, 230 W. Va. 80 (2012) (applies de novo review to legal questions from board decisions)
Davies v. W. Va. Off. of Ins. Comm'r, 227 W. Va. 330 (2011) (supports de novo review for questions of law arising in workers' comp appeals)