ISMET CATIC, Claimant
v.
TYSON FOODS, INC., Employer, Self-Insured, Defendant.
No. 5065604
Iowa Workers Compensation
Before the Iowa Workers' Compensation Commissioner
January 30, 2020
Head
Notes: 1108.50; 1801; 1802; 1804; 1703; 2501;2502; 4100
APPEAL DECISION
JOSEPH
S. CORTESE II WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSIONER
Defendant
Tyson Foods, Inc., self-insured employer, appeals from an
arbitration decision filed on August 10, 2018. Claimant Ismet
Catic responds to the appeal. The case was heard on May 9,
2018, and it was considered fully submitted in front of the
deputy workers' compensation commissioner on May 30,
2018.
In the
arbitration decision, the deputy commissioner found
claimant's neck, low back, and bilateral shoulder, arm,
forearm, wrist and hand conditions were cumulative,
work-related injuries that arose out of and in the course of
his employment with defendant. As a result of those injuries,
the deputy commissioner found claimant was an odd-lot worker
entitled to an award of permanent total disability. The
deputy commissioner also awarded claimant medical expenses
for the work-related conditions. Lastly, the deputy
commissioner found claimant was entitled to reimbursement for
the independent medical examination (IME) of Farid Manshadi,
M.D., and awarded costs for the report of Arnold Delbridge,
M.D.
On
appeal, defendant argues claimant failed to satisfy his
burden to prove he sustained work-related injuries to any
body part other than his right elbow. Defendant additionally
asserts claimant is not permanently and totally disabled
under either the traditional industrial disability analysis
or the odd-lot analysis, and defendant seeks a credit if
claimant is found to be less than permanently totally
disabled. Lastly, defendant appeals the deputy
commissioner's award of medical expenses and the cost
assessment.
Those
portions of the proposed agency decision pertaining to issues
not raised on appeal are adopted as a part of this appeal
decision.
I
performed a de novo review of the evidentiary record and the
detailed arguments of the parties. Pursuant to Iowa Code
sections 17A.5 and 86.24, those portions of the proposed
arbitration decision filed on August 10, 2018, that relate to
the issues properly raised on intra-agency appeal are
affirmed in part with additional findings and analysis and
modified in part.
With
respect to whether claimant sustained work-related injuries
to any body part beyond his right elbow, defendant takes
particular issue with the deputy commissioner's decision
to give the opinions of Robert Gordon, M.D., less weight than
the opinions of Dr. Delbridge and Dr. Manshadi. In this case,
however, none of the expert opinions were without flaws,
including those of Dr. Gordon. The deputy commissioner
appropriately and adequately addressed those flaws and
provided her rationale for giving Dr. Gordon's opinions
less weight. (See Arbitration Decision, p. 14) I
adopt that rationale and affirm the deputy commissioner's
determination to give Dr. Gordon's opinion less weight
than the opinions of Dr. Delbridge and Dr. Manshadi.
Defendant
asserts on appeal that the deputy commissioner misrepresented
and manipulated Dr. Gordon's hearing testimony. Defendant
is correct that the deputy commissioner made a mistake by
attributing 30 percent of Dr. Gordon's practice to the
treatment of defendant's employees when he actually
testified to 15 percent. This, however, appears to...