12-0081. JERALYN K. PHIFER Employee Respondant v. FAIRBANKS MEMORIAL HOSPITAL Employer and SENTRY INSURANCE MUTUAL CO Insurer Petitioners.
Court | Alaska |
Alaska Workers Compensation Decisions
2012.
Workers' Compensation Board
12-0081.
JERALYN K. PHIFER Employee Respondant v. FAIRBANKS MEMORIAL HOSPITAL Employer and SENTRY INSURANCE MUTUAL CO Insurer Petitioners
ALASKA
WORKERS' COMPENSATION BOARDP.O. Box 115512 Juneau,
Alaska 99811 -5512JERALYN K.
PHIFER, Employee, Respondant, v. FAIRBANKS MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, Employer, and
SENTRY INSURANCE MUTUAL CO, Insurer, Petitioners.AWCB Case No. 200821314AWCB Decision No. 12-0081Filed with AWCB Fairbanks, AlaskaOn May 2,
2012FINAL DECISION AND ORDERFairbanks Memorial Hospital's (Employer) November 3, 2010
petition for sanctions was heard in Fairbanks, Alaska on March 15, 2012.
Attorney Robert Groseclose appeared for employer and its insurer. Jeralyn
Phifer (Employee) did not appear. The Board proceeded with the hearing pursuant
to 8 AAC 45.070(f). The record closed at the hearing's conclusion on March
15,2012.
ISSUE
Jeralyn Phifer v. Fairbanks Memorial Hospital,
AWCB Decision No. 11-0136 (August 26, 2011) (Phifer
7), ordered Employee to provide Employer with signed releases within
thirty days of that decision, and provided for the dismissal of Employee's
claim should she fail to do so. Employer contends Employee has still not
provided the ordered releases and is now seeking an order dismissing Employee's
claim. Employer contends it has made numerous and unsuccessful efforts to
depose Employee, to re-schedule Employee's deposition after she failed to
attend, and to obtain releases of information from Employee. Employer contends
Employee failed to attend multiple prehearing conferences. Employer contends
every effort has been made to accommodate Employee, and since this is an
"extreme" case of non-compliance, Employee's claim should be dismissed.
Employee did participate in the hearing and so her position is
unknown. It is assumed Employee contends her claim should not be
dismissed.
1) Was Employee properly noticed of the hearing?
2) Shall Employee be sanctioned under AS 23.30.108(c) for her
failure to sign releases?
3) If so, what is an appropriate sanction?
FINDINGS OF FACT
A preponderance of the evidence in the record as a whole
supports the following facts and factual conclusions:
1) The findings of fact and factual conclusions of
Jeralyn Phifer v. Fairbanks Memorial Hospital, AWCB Decision
No. 11-0136 (August 26, 2011) (Phifer I), are reaffirmed and
incorporated into this decision.
2) Employee was employed by Fairbanks Memorial Hospital as a
Registered Nurse. On December 2, 2008, Employee reported injuring her back
while repositioning a patient. (Report of Occupational Injury or Illness,
December 15, 2008).
3) On August 5, 2010, the Board issued a subpoena for
Employee's deposition, scheduled for August 19, 2010. (Subpoena for Deposition,
August 5, 2010).
4) On August 14, 2010, Employer controverted Employee's claim
based on the report from its independent medical evaluator, Douglas Bald, M.D.
(Notice of Controversion, August 14, 2010).
5) On August 24, 2010, Employee filed a petition for a
protective order seeking "Protection of medical records." (Employee's Petition
for Protective Order, August 24, 2010).
6) On August 25, 2010, Employer opposed Employee's petition for
protective order. (Employer's Opposition, August 25, 2010).
7) Although the record is silent as to a reason, Employee's
deposition was rescheduled from August 19, 2010 to September 27, 2010.
(Subpoena for Deposition, September 10, 2010).
8) On September 20, 2010, Christopher Beltzer, Esq., entered
his appearance for Employee. (Entry of Appearance, September 20, 2010).
9) At prehearing on September 20, 2010, the parties confirmed
Employee's deposition was set for September 27, 2010, and agreed to postpone
Employee's petition for protective order in order to allow Employee's attorney
an opportunity to review the file and file a brief. (Prehearing Conference
Summary, September 20, 2010).
10) The parties agreed to reschedule Employee's deposition from
September 27, 2010 to October 18, 2010. (Employer's Petition for Sanctions,
November 5, 2010; Wilson).
11) On October 4, 2010, Employee filed her memorandum in
support of her petition for a protective order. (Employee's Memorandum, October
4, 2010).
12) At an October 5, 2010 prehearing, the parties resolved
Employee's petition for protective order and Employee agreed to sign the
releases. (Prehearing Conference Summary, October 5, 2010).
13) On October 14, 2010, counsel for Employee withdrew from the
case. (Notice of Withdrawal, October 14, 2010).
14) On October 18, 2010, Employee did not attend her properly
noticed deposition. (Wilson Affidavit, November 3, 2010).
15) On November 5, 2010, Employer filed its petition for
sanctions. (Petition for Sanctions, November 11, 2010).
16) Employee did not attend a January 18, 2011 prehearing on
the issue of Employer's petition for sanctions. Board staff attempted to
contact Employee at her telephone number of record and left a message. Employer
reported Employee had not returned...
To continue reading
Request your trial