NED E. HOOD (Appellant)
v.
MAINE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS (Appellee)
and
STATE OF MAINE WORKERS’ COMPENSATION DIVISION (Insurer)
Decision No. 21-5
No. A.D. 18-0018
Maine Workers Compensation Decisions
State of Maine Workers’ Compensation Board
January 29, 2021
Argued: December 13, 2018.
Attorney for Appellant: Benjamin K. Grant, Esq., McTEAGUE
HIGBEE
Attorneys for Appellee: Anne-Marie Storey, Esq., John K.
Hamer, Esq., RUDMAN & WINCHELL.
PANEL
MEMBERS: Administrative Law Judges Pelletier, Hirtle, and
Stovall.
Pelletier, Administrative Law Judge.
[¶1]
Ned Hood appeals from a decision of a Workers’
Compensation Board administrative law judge (Elwin,
ALJ), issued after a remand from the Appellate Division,
denying his Petition for Payment of Medical and Related
Services and granting his Petition for Award in part. Mr.
Hood contends that even after remand, the ALJ’s
findings are not supported by competent evidence and that the
ALJ’s application of the law to the facts is arbitrary
or without rational foundation. Additionally, Mr. Hood argues
that the record compels a finding of ongoing causation from
the date of the injury to the present. We disagree and affirm
the ALJ’s decision.
I.
BACKGROUND
[¶2]
In 2016, Mr. Hood appealed from an ALJ decision dated
November 17, 2016. The Appellate Division affirmed that
decision in part and remanded in part for further findings of
fact and conclusions of law on the sole issue of whether the
record contained clear and convincing evidence contrary to
the medical findings of an independent medical examiner
(IME), appointed pursuant to 39-A M.R.S.A. § 312 (Pamph.
2020). The IME had opined that the effects of Mr.
Hood’s compensable respiratory injury had ended by
September 23, 2009. See Hood v. Maine Dep’t of
Corr., Me. W.C.B. No. 18-5 (App. Div. 2018).
[¶3]
The Appellate Division’s mandate included a direction
that the ALJ issue additional findings addressing the
IME’s specific expertise with toxic exposure cases when
compared to other expert medical opinions in the case...
