2007-027. Stephen Olafson Movant vs. State of Alaska Dep't of Trans. and Pub. Facilities Respondent.

Case DateJanuary 11, 2007
CourtAlaska
Alaska Workers Compensation Decisions 2007. Workers' Compensation Appeals Commission 2007-027. Stephen Olafson Movant vs. State of Alaska Dep't of Trans. and Pub. Facilities Respondent Alaska Workers' Compensation Appeals Commission Stephen Olafson, Movant, vs. State of Alaska, Dep't of Trans. and Pub. Facilities, Respondent.Decision No. 027 January 11, 2007AWCAC Appeal No. 06-033 AWCB Decision No. 06-0301 AWCB Case No. 199017083Memorandum Decision and Order Motion for Extraordinary Review from Alaska Workers' Compensation Board Decision No. 06-0301, issued November 9, 2006 by the south-central panel at Anchorage, Krista M. Shwarting, Chairman, Patricia A. Vollendorf, Member for Labor, and S. T. Hagedorn, Member for Management. Appearances: Michael J. Jensen, Law Offices of Michael J. Jensen, for movant Stephen Olafson; Talis J. Colberg, Attorney General, and Joe Cooper, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent State of Alaska, Department of Transportation and Public Facilities. This decision has been edited to conform to technical standards for publication.Commissioners: John Giuchici, Chris N. Johansen, and Kristin Knudsen.By: John Giuchici, Appeals Commissioner. Stephan Olafson moved the commission to grant extraordinary review of the board's interlocutory decision to affirm the pre-hearing officer's refusal to appoint a new SIME despite the parties' stipulation and to decline to strike the Second Independent Medical Evaluation (SIME) report. Because we believe that review at this time will provide guidance to the board on an issue that will otherwise evade review, we grant extraordinary review. Factual background and board proceedings. The parties to this claim agreed to an SIME on January 26, 2006. The pre-hearing officer selected Dr. Charles Brooks to perform the SIME and scheduled the evaluation for March 27, 2006. The employee, Mr. Olafson, provided questions for the SIME in February, expressing particular concern regarding any potential conflict of interest. The pre-hearing officer's appointment letter to Dr. Brooks asked him to disclose any previous medical evaluations performed on behalf of the employer, the State of Alaska, over the previous year; any other potential conflict of interest; and asked him not to begin reviewing the medical records before he revealed any potential conflict. To avoid any such conflicts, on March 16, 2006, the parties stipulated that another physician, Dr. Paul Puziss, should perform the SIME. However, when the pre-hearing officer called Dr. Brooks to cancel the evaluation on March 20, 2006, he informed her that he had already spent "an extensive amount of time reviewing the medical records." Dr. Brooks also acknowledged that he had performed some evaluations for the employer, but not so large a number as to constitute a conflict of interest for him to perform the SIME. As a...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT