Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout972129.tiff RUTH C. MALMAN, PC. 3773 Cherry Creek Drive North Suite 575 Attorney at Law _ Denver,Colorado 80209 Telephone:303-466-8442 Fax:303-466-9228 419 Canyon,Suite 300 CL_r" Fort Collins,Colorado 80521 Telephone:970-2214078 I. August 27, 1997 Administrative Law Judge Gandy Division of Administrative Hearings 1120 Lincoln Denver, Colorado Re: WC 4-164-380 Jack Darnall v. Weld County Dear Judge Gandy: Enclosed please find proposed Specific Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order pursuant to your order and Ms. Clisham's request for same. Respectfully submitted, Ruth C. Malman cc: Jack E. Darnall Weld County Subsequent injury Fund Patricia J. Clisham Jill M. Gallet /,�" ge d/QJ PE 972129 7 STATE OF COLORADO EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT W.C. No. 4-164-380 SPECIFIC FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER IN THE MATTER OF THE CLAIM OF: JACK E. DARNALL, Claimant, vs. 1 , WELD COUNTY, and SELF-INSURED c/o OHMS, CD Insurer, Respondents. Carrier No. 92-314714-00154 Hearing was held in the above referenced matter on August 8, 1997 by Administrative Law Judge H. Conway Gandy at Fort Collins, Colorado. Claimant appeared in person and by counsel, Ruth C. Hainan. Respondents appeared by counsel, Patricia J. Clisham. The Subsequent Injury Fund appeared by Assistant Attorney General Jill M. Gallet. The issues heard were permanent total disability, medical benefits (Grover) , Subsequent Injury Fund and apportionment. The parties stipulated that if Claimant is determined to be permanent total the Subsequent Injury Fund is liable to two thirds of his net permanent total disability benefits, after credit for Social Security Disability benefits, and respondent employer is liable for one third of such permanent total disability benefits. Based upon a complete review of all the evidence, medical reports, vocational reports and other documents submitted at the hearing, the following are the Findings of Fact: FINDINGS OF FACT Based upon the evidence presented at the hearing and contained in the record, the Administrative Law Judge enters the following Findings of Fact: 1. The Claimant is 53 years old and did not complete the 8th grade. The Claimant ' s spelling and writing is at the 4th grade level and the Claimant has learning difficulties. The Claimant has physical restrictions which included being able to sit for up to 1/2 hour, stand 10 minutes, walk for 1/2 hour at a time, lift ten pounds, drive for 1/2 hour to 45 minutes at a time. 2 . The Claimant has to lay down several times a day as the only way to get pain relief. The Administrative Law Judge finds this testimony credible. 3 . The Claimant used to work, do lawn work, paint, fish and hunt among other activities he no longer can do. The Claimant attempted to return to work as a dishwasher and lasted one hour. The more active he is the more pain he has. 4 . The Claimant began working when he was 15 years old. He did mostly physical work. The Claimant worked for the Road & Bridge Department at Weld County since July of 1975 . 5 . Since the Claimant began working for Weld County he sustained injury to his left knee, right shoulder, both wrists, two hernias, surgery on his foot and surgery on his back. The Claimant has continued to get worse since the surgery on his back. Recently the Claimant' s leg gave out and he has continuing back pain from his low back into his buttocks down into his feet. 6. The Claimant attempted to get his GED but could not sit at the computer to achieve this. 7 . Theresa Boynton, occupational therapist, WorkCare, in accordance with her Functional Capacity Evaluation of May 21, 1996, testified that the Claimant was in the light/sedentary category, even though she did not do repetitive testing as she testified this is only done when looking at specific jobs. 8 . Ruth Hannigan, Health & Occupational Consultants, Inc. , testifying for the Respondents, stated that in preparing her vocational rehabilitation report, she relied on a year old Functional Capacity Evaluation as foundation for what the Claimant was capable of doing in the field of employment. 9 . Ruth Hannigan first testified that she felt the Claimant could be employed in such jobs as security guard, ticket taker or research surveyor. 10 . Ruth Hannigan testified that in her opinion, the Claimant could only work at those jobs part time in sedentary employment. Ruth Hannigan further testified that if the Claimant had to lie down several times during the work day, there were no jobs the Claimant could do. 11. The Claimant had Dr. Bruce Lockwood available for testimony as to Grover medicals. 12 . The Respondents stipulated and agreed that any treatment recommended up to the date of hearing was authorized and would be paid for by the Respondents. Further treatment was subject to the reasonable and necessary standards. 13 . The Claimant testified that he was still taking medications, that a psychologist for pain management had been recommended and he still needed to see the doctor for ongoing care. Grover Medicals are found to be reasonable and necessary. 14 . The Functional Capacity Evaluation is not reliable evidence as it is 15 months old and not consistent with the Claimant' s testimony regarding his condition getting worse and the need to periodically lay down. 15 . Christina Raithke-Bishop of Colorado Physical Therapy Services opines, in her report dated July 14, 1997 , concerning other inconsistencies in the Functional Capacity Evaluation. 16 . Dr. Bruce Lockwood opines, in a report dated April 12, 1996, that the Claimant has sustained a 19% whole person impairment as a result of this work injury. 17 . Patrick Renfro, vocational rehabilitation expert from National Care Resources Inc. , opined that Claimant " . . . has suffered such significant losses of access to the labor market coupled with a constellation of significant physical and functional limitations, as to make it impossible for him to earn a wage. " 18 . The parties agree and it is so found that Claimant reached maximum medical improvement on April 12 , 1996 . CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Based upon the above Findings of Fact, the Administrative Law Judge makes the following Conclusions of Law: 1. The Claimant is disabled due to his injuries on the job with Weld County. 2 . Taking into consideration the need for Claimant to lie down, along with all the other physical restrictions together with Ruth Hannigan's testimony that there would be no jobs available for the Claimant, it is concluded that as a matter of law and fact that the Claimant is permanently and totally disabled. 3 . Based on Dr. Lockwood' s reports, Patrick Renfro' s opinion, Ruth Hannigan' s testimony and the credibility of the Claimant regarding his age, employment history of manual physical labor, physical condition with a 19% low back impairment and other injured body parts, his education and achievement levels, his ability to handle pain and his perception of pain, it is concluded that claimant is not capable of earning a wage in the general labor market and is therefore permanently and totally disabled. 4 . Any conflicts which have arisen in the evidence are resolved in favor of the Claimant. ORDER IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT: 1. The Claimant, Jack Darnall, is permanently and totally disabled as a result of his work injury. 2 . The Respondent Employer shall pay the Claimant' s reasonable and necessary medical benefits incurred as a result of his injuries in the herein matter and that are needed to maintain his condition, subsequent to maximum medical improvement. 3 . Permanent Total Disability Benefits are to be paid two- thirds by the Subsequent Injury Fund and one-third by Respondent Employer, pursuant to the aforesaid stipulation of the parties, from the date of maximum medical improvement of April 12 , 1996 and continuing for Claimant's lifetime. 4 . Respondent Employer and the Subsequent Injury Fund may take the Social Security offset which has been heretofore taken in the herein matter, pursuant to statute. 5. Respondent Employer and the Subsequent Injury Fund shall pay Claimant interest of 8% per annum on all compensation due, not paid when due, pursuant to statute. rd DONE this 3 day of 14P iy� �.". l r , 1997 . ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE //14 /, H. CONWAY DY THIS DECISION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE IS FINAL UNLESS A PETITION TO REVIEW THIS DECISION IS FILED WITHIN TWENTY (20) DAYS FROM THE DATE THIS DECISION IS MAILED. THE PETITION TO REVIEW SHOULD BE FILED OR DELIVERED AT THE DIVISION OF WORKERS ' COMPENSATION, P. 0. BOX 8287, FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80526-8003. itta CERTIFICATE OF MAILING I hereby certify that a true copy of the foregoing SPECIFIC FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER was placed in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid on the , addressed to the following: 3 1997' /„/i� Jack E. Darnall ??�'�941 Nantucket St. Windsor, CO 80550 Weld County P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632-0758 Subsequent Injury Fund P.O. Box 300009 Denver, CO 80203-0009 Ruth C. Neiman, Esq. 3773 Cherry Creek Drive North, Suite 575 Denver, CO 80209 Patricia J. Clisham, Esq. 1200 - 17th St. , #1700 Denver, CO 80202-5817 Jill M. Gallet, A.A.G. Office of the Attorney General Civil Litigation Section 1525 Sherman Street 5th Floor Denver, CO 80203 Hello