Daniel Hoefs Applicant
Sigma Aldrich Co. Employer
Travelers Prop. Cas. Co. of Amer. Insurer
No. 2015-016627
Wisconsin Workers Compensation
State of Wisconsin Labor And Industry Review Commission
November 30, 2018
Atty.
Scott E. Wade
WORKER’S COMPENSATION DECISION
1
Georgia E. Maxwell, Chairperson.
Order
The
commission modifies and
affirms the decision of the administrative
law judge. Accordingly, the application for benefits is
dismissed.
By the
Commission:
Laurie
R. McCallum, Commissioner, David B. Falstad, Commissioner.
Procedural
Posture
This
case is before the commission to consider the
applicant’s entitlement to worker’s compensation
benefits. The applicant filed a hearing application in March
of 2016, alleging he injured his right leg and body as a
whole due to air travel to Germany on April 12, 2015. The
employer and its insurer (collectively, the respondent)
conceded jurisdictional facts and a maximum average weekly
wage. An administrative law judge for the Department of
Administration, Division of Hearings and Appeals, Office of
Worker’s Compensation Hearings, heard the matter on May
20, 2018, and issued a decision on June 8, 2018, dismissing
the application. The applicant filed a timely petition for
commission review.
The
commission has considered the petition and the positions of
the parties and has independently reviewed the evidence
submitted at the hearing. Based on its review, the commission
modifies and affirms the decision of the administrative law
judge.
Findings
of Fact and Conclusions of Law
The
commission makes the same findings of fact and conclusions of
law as stated in the decision of the administrative law judge
and incorporates them by reference into the
commission’s decision, subject to the following:
Modification
On page
3 of the decision, in the third sentence of the first
paragraph, replace the word “contributed” with
“attributed.”
Memorandum
Opinion
The
issues in this case are whether the applicant sustained an
injury by accident arising out of and incidental to his
employment on April 12, 2015, and the respondent’s
liability for medical expenses.2The applicant has the
burden of proving beyond a legitimate doubt all the facts
necessary to establish a claim for
compensation.3 Compensation must be denied if a
legitimate doubt exists regarding the facts necessary to
establish a claim, but not every doubt is automatically
legitimate or sufficient to deny compensation.[4]Legitimate
doubt must arise from contradictions and inconsistencies in
the evidence, not simply from intuition.5
The
Applicant’s Injury and Medical Treatment
The
applicant, who was born in 1964, worked as a senior
industrial engineer for the respondent where his duties
involved process improvement, and he reviewed repackaging of
hazardous chemicals to ensure that the process was safe and
efficient. He worked for the employer for about nine years
before his alleged date of injury. Prior to the alleged
injury date, the applicant indicated that he had no issues
with his right lower extremity, never took medications for
his right lower extremity, and never had any surgery for his
right lower extremity.
On
April 12, 2015, the applicant flew to Germany to work for a
week. He had no...