Wright v. Labor Commission
2021 UT App 43
Utah Ct. App.2021Background
- In August 2007 Wright injured his back moving fixtures at work; he sought treatment and was released to regular work without restrictions on September 5, 2007.
- He had a prior 1987 back injury; later developed recurrent symptoms leading to a March 2012 lumbar fusion and a March 2013 T11–12 fusion.
- Wright claimed ongoing disability and benefits from the 2007 accident; treating physicians differed on causation and stability.
- An ALJ appointed a medical panel (Dr. Jones, general surgeon, and Dr. Biggs, family/occupational physician). The panel reviewed records and concluded the accident caused a temporary sprain/strain and that Wright returned to baseline and reached medical stability by Sept. 5, 2007.
- The ALJ and then the Labor Commission adopted the panel’s opinion, awarded limited medical expenses, denied temporary total disability, and sustained the panel’s qualifications; Wright’s late challenge alleging panel bias was rejected as untimely.
- Wright petitioned for judicial review; the Utah Court of Appeals affirmed the Commission, refusing to disturb the findings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether alleged financial ties created a disqualifying bias in the medical panel | Wright argued Dr. Biggs’s ties (adjunct role at Rocky Mountain and donations from insurer WCF) created a conflict requiring a new panel | Respondents/Commission argued the conflict issue was raised too late and was procedurally forfeited before the Commission | Court declined to reach the merits: Wright waived the issue by raising it in a second, untimely motion for reconsideration |
| Whether panel members were qualified under the statute to opine on causation and stability | Wright argued the panelists were generalists, lacked specialized spine-surgery or advanced pain-treatment credentials, and thus were not "physicians specializing in the treatment of the disease or condition" | Commission and respondents argued panelists had extensive experience treating back conditions and causation analysis, satisfying statutory qualification and discretionary standards | Court held Commission did not abuse its discretion admitting the panel reports; panelists had sufficient experience to opine on the causation/stability issues |
| Whether substantial evidence supports the Commission’s finding that the 2007 accident only temporarily aggravated preexisting degeneration and that Wright returned to baseline by Sept. 5, 2007 | Wright argued the Commission ignored the “lighting up” doctrine and discounted treating physicians who tied later symptoms to the accident | Respondents pointed to panel, treating/independent physician reports, imaging showing degenerative disease (not acute injury), gaps in treatment after 2007, and conclusions that the 2007 aggravation resolved | Court held the Commission applied correct law and substantial evidence (panel, Drs. Mattingly/Schumann, imaging, records) supports the finding of only temporary aggravation and medical stability as of Sept. 5, 2007 |
Key Cases Cited
- Foye v. Labor Comm’n, 428 P.3d 26 (Utah Ct. App. 2018) (abuse-of-discretion standard for refusing to exclude medical-panel reports)
- Edwards v. Tillery, 671 P.2d 195 (Utah 1983) (a physician’s broader practice does not automatically disqualify him from serving on a medical panel if he has relevant experience)
- White v. Labor Comm’n, 474 P.3d 493 (Utah Ct. App. 2020) (worker must show causal connection between injury and employment; appellate limits on reweighing evidence)
- Fogleman v. Labor Comm’n, 364 P.3d 756 (Utah Ct. App. 2015) (medical causation and aggravation of preexisting conditions are factual questions reviewed for substantial evidence)
- Hutchings v. Labor Comm’n, 378 P.3d 1273 (Utah Ct. App. 2016) (standards of review for legal questions vs factual findings in Labor Commission appeals)
- Valdez v. Labor Comm’n, 397 P.3d 753 (Utah Ct. App. 2017) (temporary aggravation permits recovery only for the temporary worsening, not unrelated later symptoms)
- Danny’s Drywall v. Labor Comm’n, 339 P.3d 624 (Utah Ct. App. 2014) (medical panels are appointed to evaluate medical evidence and advise fact-finders)