5379 CRB-5-08-9 (2009). Santiago v. Laidlaw Transit, Inc.
Court | Connecticut |
Connecticut Workers Compensation
2009.
5379 CRB-5-08-9 (2009).
Santiago v. Laidlaw Transit, Inc
CASE NO. 5379
CRB-5-08-9COMPENSATION REVIEW
BOARD
WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSIONJULY 27, 2009MARTHA SANTIAGO CLAIMANT-APPELLEE v.
LAIDLAW TRANSIT, INC. EMPLOYER and CRAWFORD & COMPANY INSURER
RESPONDENTS-APPELLANTSAPPEARANCES: The claimant was represented by Paul S. Ranando,
Esq., Law Offices of Paul S. Ranando, 195 South Main Street, Cheshire, CT
06410. The respondents were represented by Diane Duhamel, Esq., McGann,
Bartlett & Brown, LLC, 111 Founders Plaza, Suite 1201, East Hartford, CT
06108. This Petition for Review from September 4, 2008 Finding and Award of the
Commissioner acting for the Fifth District was heard February 27, 2009 before a
Compensation Review Board panel consisting of the Commission Chairman John A.
Mastropietro and Commissioners Peter C. Mlynarczyk and Nancy E. Salerno.OPINION JOHN A. MASTROPIETRO, CHAIRMAN. The claimant in this matter
sustained a compensable back injury and subsequently suffered non-work related
accidents prior to undergoing additional back surgery. She asserts the surgery
and the additional level of disability are due to her original work related
injury. The respondents contested this claim at the trial level and have
appealed the award, arguing that the precedent in Hatt v. Burlington Coat
Factory, 263 Conn. 279 (2003) barred such an award. We conclude that the Hatt
precedent does not apply to this scenario and that the trial commissioner in
this matter had sufficient grounds to award benefits to the claimant in this
matter. We affirm the Finding and Award and dismiss the appeal.The following facts are pertinent to our consideration. The
claimant suffered a compensable back injury while employed by the respondents
on May 3, 2001. After conservative treatment of the injury proved unsuccessful,
the claimant's primary care physician, Dr. Joseph Brenes ordered an MRI. This
test disclosed a broad central and right posterolateral L4-5 disc bulge
compressing the right L-5 nerve root. On October 3, 2002, the claimant came
under the care of Dr. Michael Karnasiewicz, a neurosurgeon. He diagnosed right
L5 lumbar radiculopathy secondary to a herniated disc based on the MRI of
August 31, 2002, and recommended surgical correction.
The claimant underwent spinal surgery in December 2002 with Dr.
Karnasiewicz consisting of an L4-5 disc excision and decompression of the L5
nerve root. Following this surgery the claimant developed post-operative low
back pain radiating into both buttocks and both proximal thighs. As a result,
the claimant underwent an MRI on January 13, 2003. The MRI disclosed
significant post-op changes on the right side at L4-5 with enhanced posterior
epidural scar tissue at that level, causing moderate stenosis. As a result of
continued pain in her low back and leg area, the claimant had another MRI
performed on February 13, 2003. Among the findings was post-op epidural
scarring on the right side at L4-5 slightly distorting the right L5 nerve
root.
Following the MRIs, the claimant underwent evaluation and
treatment with Dr. Bhavesh Patel, a pain management specialist. The claimant
treated with Dr. Patel until August 29, 2003, during which time, in addition to
receiving physical therapy, she tried numerous medications. Throughout this
period of time, the claimant complained consistently of significant right sided
low back and right posterior leg pain. The claimant also continued to see Dr.
Karnasiewicz through March 30, 2004 complaining of back and buttock pain. Both
Dr. Karnasiewicz and the respondents' examiner, Dr. William Druckemiller,
evaluated the claimant with permanent disability from the 2001 injury. Dr.
Karnasiewicz also believed the claimant was unemployable partially as a result
of the injury. Based upon the ratings of Dr. Karnasiewicz and Dr. Druckemiller,
the claimant was compensated for 13.3% permanent partial disability of the
lower back with a maximum medical improvement date of October 14, 2003.
On March 30, 2004 Dr. Karnasiewicz reported that the claimant's
major complaint was bilateral lower back pain without radiation to her lower
extremities and there was no change to her disability ratings or employability
status. On April 7, 2004 the claimant presented to the emergency room of
Waterbury Hospital complaining of burning left lower back pain, radiating to
her left leg. The hospital records reflect that the claimant said her pain had
been increasing over the past two weeks. The claimant had received Darvocet at
the hospital on March 30, 2004; on April 7, 2004 she was administered morphine
and sent home.
The claimant suffered two non-work related injuries in April
2004. On April 11, 2004 the claimant slipped and fell at C-Town Supermarket
landing on her buttocks. X-rays immediately afterward revealed no acute injury
and she was treated at the hospital and released. On April 29, 2004, the
claimant was involved in a motor vehicle accident. The incident was a low speed
collision with minor vehicle damage. Waterbury Hospital records indicate the
claimant was complaining of neck, low back and leg pain following the motor
vehicle accident. Only x-rays of the cervical spine were taken...
To continue reading
Request your trial