Goodrich v. Centerpoint Energy, Inc., 122220 MNWC, WC20-6339

Case DateDecember 22, 2020
CourtMinnesota
DONALD GOODRICH, Employee/Respondent,
v.
CENTERPOINT ENERGY, INC., and TRAVELERS GRP., Employer-Insurer/Appellants,
And
PHYSICIANS DIAGNOSTICS, Intervenor.
No. WC20-6339
Minnesota Workers Compensation
Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals
December 22, 2020
         NOTICE OF INJURY – GILLETTE INJURY. Substantial evidence supports the compensation judge’s conclusion that the employer had sufficient knowledge of the employee’s injury within the statutory notice requirements.          WEEKLY WAGE – CALCULATION. The compensation judge did not err in including payment for sick leave the employee earned and received when unable to work for a non-work-related condition in calculating his weekly wage.           Gary Manka, Katz & Manka, Ltd., Minnetonka, Minnesota, for the Respondent.           Mark A. Kleinschmidt, Cousineau, Waldhauser, Kieselbach, P.A., Mendota Heights, Minnesota, for the Appellants.           Determined by: David A. Stofferahn, Judge, Patricia J. Milun, Chief Judge, Sean M. Quinn, Judge           Compensation Judge: Kirsten Tate          Affirmed.          OPINION           DAVID A. STOFFERAHN, Judge          The employer and insurer appeal from the compensation judge’s determination that the employee gave timely notice of his work injury as required by the statute and from the compensation judge’s average weekly wage determination. We affirm.          BACKGROUND          The employee, Donald Goodrich, began working for the employer, Centerpoint Energy, in 2008. He passed a pre-employment physical examination. Initially, Mr. Goodrich made service calls on residential customers for furnaces and air conditioning maintenance and repair. His work was later expanded to include residential service calls for washers, dryers, and other household appliances. These assignments required crawling, bending, and twisting to access confined spaces to reach pipes and appliances, as well as lifting and moving of appliances. According to the job description from the employer, lifting 75 pounds on a regular basis was required. Mr. Goodrich’s job also involved significant mandatory overtime; his employment records showed more than 500 hours of overtime in 2013-2014. Wage records introduced by the employer at hearing showed that 45 percent of the employee’s pay in 2014 was overtime pay.          The employee received intermittent chiropractic care beginning in 2014. He began treating with Dr. Stephen Kramer, a chiropractor, on March 23, 2015, with complaints of low back pain. An MRI scan was done on April 1, 2015, which was read as showing multilevel degenerative disc disease and Schmorl’s nodes. A physician’s statement dated June 13, 2015, was faxed to “Rosie” at Centerpoint, who the employee identified as a human resources representative at the corporate office. In the statement, Dr. Kramer limited the employee to lifting no more than 50 pounds and...

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