428 P.3d 314
Okla.
2018
UPTON v. CITY OF TULSA
Skip to Main Content Accessibility Statement
  • Help
  • Contact Us
  • e-payments
  • Careers
OSCN Found Document:UPTON v. CITY OF TULSA
  1. Previous Case
  2. Top Of Index
  3. This Point in Index
  4. Citationize
  5. Next Case
  6. Print Only

UPTON v. CITY OF TULSA
2018 OK 69
Case Number: 115557; Comp. w/115558; 115717
Decided: 09/18/2018
THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA

Cite as: 2018 OK 69, __ P.3d __

NOTICE: THIS OPINION HAS NOT BEEN RELEASED FOR PUBLICATION. UNTIL RELEASED, IT IS SUBJECT TO REVISION OR WITHDRAWAL.

JARED UPTON, Petitioner,
v.
CITY OF TULSA and THE WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION, Respondents.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

COMBS, C.J.:

¶1 This is an appeal of an Order Affirming Decision of Administrative Law Judge by the Oklahoma Workers' Compensation Commission En Banc, on November 17, 2016. Petitioner suffered a compensable injury after the effective date of the Administrative Workers' Compensation Act (AWCA) (Title 85A). The Administrative Law Judge awarded Petitioner Permanent Partial Disability (PPD). Petitioner challenged the constitutionality of several sections of the AWCA which mandate the exclusive use of the latest edition of the American Medical Association's Guide (AMA Guide) to evaluate and award PPD. The ALJ found the use of the AMA Guide to be constitutional. The Oklahoma Workers' Compensation Commission En Banc affirmed. The dispositive issue on appeal concerns the constitutionality of the sections of the AWCA which mandate the use of the AMA Guide. This cause was assigned to this office on March 28, 2018.

¶2 Upon review of the record and briefs of the parties, this Court has determined the issues raised in this appeal have already been decided in our recent opinion, Hill v. American Medical Response, 2018 OK 57, ____P.3d_____, 2018 WL 3121718. In Hill this Court held the required use of the AMA Guide in the AWCA was constitutional. The Order of the Oklahoma Workers' Compensation Commission En Banc is affirmed.

¶3 Combs, C.J., Winchester and Darby, JJ., concur;

¶4 Kauger and Edmondson, JJ., concur by reason of stare decisis;

¶5 Gurich, V.C.J. and Reif, J., dissent;

¶6 Colbert and Wyrick, JJ., recused.

Citationizer© Summary of Documents Citing This Document
Cite Name Level
None Found.
Citationizer: Table of Authority
Cite Name Level
Oklahoma Supreme Court Cases
 CiteNameLevel
 2018 OK 57, HILL v. AMERICAN MEDICAL RESPONSECited







oscn

EMAIL: webmaster@oscn.net
Oklahoma Judicial Center
2100 N Lincoln Blvd.
Oklahoma City, OK 73105

courts
  • Supreme Court of Oklahoma
  • Court of Criminal Appeals
  • Court of Civil Appeals
  • District Courts
decisions
  • New Decisions
  • Supreme Court of Oklahoma
  • Court of Criminal Appeals
  • Court of Civil Appeals
programs
  • The Sovereignty Symposium
  • Alternative Dispute Resolution
  • Early Settlement Mediation
  • Children's Court Improvement Program (CIP)
  • Judicial Nominating Commission
  • Certified Courtroom Interpreters
  • Certified Shorthand Reporters
  • Accessibility ADA
  • Contact Us
  • Careers
  • Accessibility ADA