Hoefs, 113018 WIWC, 2015-016627

Case DateNovember 30, 2018
CourtWisconsin
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...

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