Worker's Compensation Claim of Green v. State ex rel. Department of Workforce Services, Workers' Safety & Compensation Division
304 P.3d 941
| Wyo. | 2013Background
- Green suffered a work-related lumbar spine injury in 2004; after surgeries, he was rated 21% whole person impairment (WPI) in 2005.
- In 2010 Green underwent another spine surgery and later had a 7% WPI rating in 2011 after maximum medical improvement.
- The Division denied any additional permanent partial impairment (PPI) beyond the 21% award; Green appealed to the Commission, which upheld the Division, and the district court affirmed.
- Dr. Kaplan rated Green at 21% WPI in 2005; his report supported the 21% rating.
- Dr. MacGuire (2011) rated 7% and Dr. Nieves (2011) rated 6%; the Division denied additional PPI benefits based on these ratings being below 21%.
- The Court held that the impairment rating must use the most recent AMA Guides edition and that offset is required to avoid double recovery, and that the present impairment did not warrant a higher PPI.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| AMA Guides edition offset requirement | Green argues ratings across editions cannot offset | Division argues offset is required to avoid double recovery under §27-14-405(g) | Offset permitted; ratings compared across editions to prevent double recovery. |
| Different body parts with new surgery | Green claims new body part warrants separate PPI without offset | Division argues records show same body part affected and thus offset applies | Ratings addressed same body part; no separate new PPI without offset. |
| Substantial evidence/arbitrary capricious review | Green contends Commission's denial lacks substantial evidence and is arbitrary | Division/Commission found no impairment greater than 21% and burden on Green to prove increase | Denial supported by substantial evidence; no reversal necessary. |
Key Cases Cited
- Anderson v. State ex rel. Wyo. Workers' Safety & Comp. Div., 245 P.3d 263 (Wyo. 2010) (use the most recent AMA Guides edition at ascertainable loss; avoid double recovery)
- Taylor v. State ex rel. Wyo. Workers' Safety & Comp. Div., 72 P.3d 799 (Wyo. 2003) (double recovery avoidance; edition-based impairment ratings)
- State ex rel. Wyoming Worker's Compensation Div. v. Colvin, 681 P.2d 269 (Wyo. 1984) (double recovery principle in PPI awards)
- Singer v. State ex rel. Wyo. Workers' Safety & Comp. Div., 248 P.3d 1160 (Wyo. 2011) (guides application for multiple impairments in PPI context)
- Himes v. Petro Eng'g and Constr., 61 P.3d 393 (Wyo. 2008) (burden on claimant to prove essential elements for higher PPI rating)
- Lehman v. State ex rel. Wyoming Workers' Comp. Div., 752 P.2d 422 (Wyo. 1988) (burden of proof in change of condition cases)