Forro v. Michigan State University, 060605 MIWC, 2017-170

• Case Date: June 06, 2005
• Court: Michigan

JOYCE M. FORRO, SS# xxx, PLAINTIFF, v. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY, SELF-INSURED, DEFENDANT. No. 2017-170 Michigan Workers Compensation State of Michigan Department of Labor & Economic Growth Workers’ Compensation Agency Board of Magistrates June 6, 2005           Crystal Hundt (P#65438) for Plaintiff.           J. W. Housefield, Jr. (P#30815) for Defendant.           OPINION           CHRISTOPHER P. AMBROSE 215G JUDGE          STATEMENT OF CLAIM:          Plaintiff filed an Application in this matter which was received by the Bureau on May 6, 2005. Plaintiff alleged an injury date of October 27, 2004, and that heavy repetitive activity produced low back pain. Plaintiff further alleged that the type of work that she performed, along with several injuries during the course of her employment, produced low back and neck disability.          STIPULATIONS:          The parties stipulated that the employer and employee were subject to the Act on the date of injury alleged, and the Defendant as a self-insured carried the risk. It was also stipulated that Plaintiff was in the employ of Defendant on the date of injury alleged. It was denied that a personal injury arose out of and in the course of employment. Notice and claim were admitted. The gross average weekly wage was stipulated to be $548.88, with a discontinued fringe benefit value of $92.23, those fringe benefits being discontinued on October 31, 2004. There is no dual employment. It was denied that any disability is due to the alleged personal injury. IRS filing status was stipulated to be single with zero dependents.          WITNESSES TESTIFYING PERSONALLY:          Plaintiff:

Joyce Forro, Plaintiff

         Defendant:

Ellen Rzepka, Plaintiff's supervisor at Defendant

         EXHIBITS:          Plaintiff:

1. Deposition testimony of Paul LaClair, M.D., board-certified physiatrist/evaluator taken March 13, 2007.

2. Records of Lansing Orthopedic, P.C.

3. Records of Dr. Janine Kohler.

4. Additional records of Ryan O’Connor, D.O.

         Defendant:

A. Deposition testimony of John Flood, D.O., board-certified orthopedic surgeon/treating consultant taken April 18, 2006.

B. Deposition testimony of Wilbur Boike, M.D., board-certified neurologist/ evaluator taken November 29, 2006.

C. Records of Dr. Viera.

D. Records of Dr. delaCruz.

E. Letter signed by Drs. Handelson and O’Connor dated March 10, 2005.

         DISCUSSION          The trial in this matter was held on May 17, 2007. Plaintiff testified that she was hired by Defendant, Michigan State University, on July 1, 1996. Prior to that, she worked as a homemaker. In 1976, she was divorced, and went to work at City Dairy serving ice cream. She did this for about 1½ years. She also attended college in the late 1970’s and worked at the campus library. Plaintiff also worked at a restaurant as a grill cook which required some lifting of food product. For a period of time, Plaintiff also worked for an insurance company filling out forms. Plaintiff moved to Florida for almost eight years. While she was there, she worked for Kaiser Aluminum doing primarily paperwork and other clerical duties.          With respect to her educational background, Plaintiff graduated from Arenac Eastern High School in 1960. She attended college between 1978 and 1980, and then again in 1984 and 1985. Eventually, Plaintiff received a certificate in secretarial science from Kirtland Community College in Roscommon, Michigan.          Plaintiff also testified that when she was 35 years old, she had neck surgery. This was in 1984. Plaintiff had a fusion in her neck which primarily was to address symptoms that she was having in her right arm. The neck surgery did improve her right arm symptoms. Plaintiff had no neck problems between 1984 and when she went to work for Defendant in 1996.          When Plaintiff was hired by Defendant in 1996, she was having no symptoms in her back or neck, and had no restrictions placed upon her. At Defendant, Plaintiff always worked as a “Secretary II”. This was in the medical technology department doing copying, answering phone calls, and other secretarial duties. Plaintiff testified that she would constantly have to answer telephone calls, as well as doing copying and other duties. Plaintiff testified that she did have student assistant help at times. If there was no assistant present, she would have to do the duties herself.          Plaintiff testified that she had to do a lot of standing and stooping to change ink and paper on the copy machine. She would have to reload paper in a filing cabinet which required her to bend, stoop and load this filing cabinet with paper. Plaintiff testified that she also had to do a “never ending cycle” of typing. Plaintiff also had to twist and turn at her work station which was essentially a desk with a computer and keyboard. Plaintiff testified that she would have to twist to answer the telephone.          Plaintiff testified that in addition to the usual secretarial work, she vacuumed a large meeting room area where there were very large heavy wooden tables pushed together. She would have to move the chairs out of the way, and vacuum under the table. Plaintiff also testified about doing various dusting and cleaning activities, since there was no cleaning service in that area of the university.          Plaintiff testified that when supplies arrived, either a student helper would put those away, or she would do it if there was no student helper present. Additionally, Plaintiff testified that she would have to copy materials out of large books for students. Apparently, students were not allowed in the area of the office where the copy machine was located. Plaintiff indicated that some of these books were quite heavy and Plaintiff would have to put these books back on shelves while standing on a chair. These shelves were over six foot tall. Plaintiff is 4’11” tall.          In 2000, Plaintiff began seeing Dr. Viera for low back problems. Dr. Viera prescribed medication and ordered an x-ray of Plaintiff's back. According to Plaintiff, although treatment was provided, Plaintiff received no relief from the symptoms, and continued to work, as she needed the money to pay her bills. Plaintiff testified that subsequent to treating with Dr. Viera, she had facet injections at Sparrow Pain Clinic which would give her about one week relief, but no more than that.          Eventually, Plaintiff switched from Dr. Viera to Dr. Kohler, who referred Plaintiff to Dr. O’Connor, an orthopedic surgeon. Plaintiff first saw Dr. O’Connor in 2002, but continued to work during that time. Plaintiff testified that at this time she had soreness in her back, hips, legs and feet.          In April 2003, Plaintiff was involved in a motor vehicle accident in Perry, Michigan. She was rear ended by a truck. Plaintiff went to the hospital to get checked out, but says she was not injured at that time. She had no neck or back symptoms. She missed no time from work.          In September 2003, Plaintiff testified that she got on a chair to get a box down from a shelf above her head. This was a full box which was quite heavy. Plaintiff indicated that the weight of the box came down upon her, and she jumped off her chair and landed on the floor but did not fall from her feet. Plaintiff indicated that this caused her to have neck symptoms. She also felt a jarring type of pain in her low back.          In December 2003, Plaintiff underwent a myelogram at the request of Dr. delaCruz, a neurosurgeon. Plaintiff continued to work because she needed the money to pay bills. Plaintiff worked until October 2004. Between September 2003 and October 2004, Plaintiff testified that she no longer did the vacuuming and other janitorial work that she had done in the past but continued to do her usual job otherwise. According to her, this involved a lot of standing, stooping, twisting, walking and bending. However, according to Plaintiff she loved her job nonetheless.          In October 2004, Dr. O’Connor placed Plaintiff off work. Prior to April 1, 2005, Plaintiff was sent a letter by Defendant indicating that she needed to return to work within the restrictions that the Defendant had in their possession at that time. They advised her to return to work on April 1, 2005 at 8:00 a.m. or she would be terminated.          Plaintiff returned to work on April 1, 2005. In fact, a welcome back party was held for Plaintiff on that date. Plaintiff then advised her supervisor, Ellen Rzepka that she...