Dexter v. Hubbard Cnty. Dev. Achievement Ctr., 073019 MNWC, WC19-6261

Case DateJuly 30, 2019
CourtMinnesota
ROBERT M. DEXTER, Employee/Respondent,
v.
HUBBARD CNTY. DEV. ACHIEVEMENT CTR. and SFM MUT. INS. CO., Employer-Insurer/Appellants,
and
ESSENTIA HEALTH - DULUTH CLINIC, MINN. DEP'T OF LABOR & INDUS./VRU, SPINAL HEALTH PROF'LS, ST. JOSEPH'S AREA HEALTH SERVS., and MINN. DEP'T OF HUMAN SERVS., Intervenors.
No. WC19-6261
Minnesota Workers Compensation
Workers' Compensation Court of Appeals
July 30, 2019
         PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - MATTERS AT ISSUE. Where the compensation judge awarded benefits not claimed by the employee, and ordered payment to an intervenor for bills already acknowledged to have been paid, the compensation judge improperly expanded the issues and the related awards must be vacated.           Kristen M. Rodgers and James H. Perkett, Rodgers Law Office, P.L.L.C, Bemidji, Minnesota, for the Respondent.           Steven T. Scharfenberg, Lynn, Scharfenberg & Hollick, Minneapolis, Minnesota, for the Appellant.           Determined by: Deborah K. Sundquist, Judge, Patricia J. Milun, Chief Judge, Sean M. Quinn, Judge           Compensation Judge: Jerome G. Arnold          Vacated in part.           OPINION           DEBORAH K. SUNDQUIST, Judge.          The employer and insurer appeal the compensation judge's award of permanent partial disability (PPD) benefits and order for reimbursement of an intervenor. Because the judge's award of PPD benefits improperly expanded the issues as such benefits were neither claimed by the employee nor supported by evidence in the record, and because the employer and insurer were ordered to pay an intervention interest that was paid in full per documentation submitted at hearing, we vacate the Findings and Order in part as set forth below.          BACKGROUND          Robert Dexter, the employee, fell on both knees and hands on concrete while working for Hubbard County Developmental Achievement Center (DAC), the employer, on March 29, 2016. Before the injury, the employee had a history of right knee injuries and had already developed severe arthritis in his right knee. He claimed that he tore the right lateral meniscus as a result of the March 29, 2016, work injury. Due to the employee's knee condition, total knee replacement surgery (arthroplasty) was recommended.          The...

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