EDWIN J. JACKA, Employee,
v.
COCA-COLA BOTTLING CO. SELF-INSURED/KEMPER NAT'L INS. CO., Employer/Appellant,
and
ARVOLD CHIROPRACTIC CLINIC and COMMISSIONER, DEP'T OF LABOR & INDUS., Intervenors,
and
MINNESOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL.
Minnesota Workers Compensation
Workers' Compensation Court of Appeals
April 13, 1999
HEADNOTES
MEDICAL
TREATMENT & EXPENSE - TREATMENT
PARAMETERS. Substantial evidence supports the
compensation judge's finding that the employee's
treatment after April 3, 1995, was a valid departure from the
permanent treatment parameters.
Affirmed.
Determined by Hefte, J., Pederson, J., and Wheeler, C.J.
Compensation Judge: James R. Otto
OPINION
RICHARD C. HEFTE, Judge
The
self-insured employer appeals the compensation judge's
finding that the employee's chiropractic treatment after
April 3, 1995, was an appropriate departure from the
parameters pursuant to Minn. R. 5221.6050, subp. 8D because
the treatment decreased the employee's subjective
complaints and improved his functional status. We
affirm.
BACKGROUND
This
court's previous opinion in this case, Jacka v.
Coca-Cola Bottling Co., slip op. (W.C.C.A. Mar. 12,
1997), is incorporated herein by reference. On June 22,
1993, Edwin Jacka, (employee) sustained an admitted
work-related injury to his lumbar back in the course of his
employment with Coca-Cola Bottling Company (self-insured
employer). On May 23, 1994, the employee began treatment
with chiropractor Dr. Jordan R. Arvold and continued
treatment through the date of his hearing on June 19,
1996. The employer disputed liability for treatments
rendered by Dr. Arvold from October 17, 1994 to June 19,
1996. Following a hearing, the compensation judge found
that the treatment rendered by Dr. Arvold provided
significant relief for the employee's condition, was
consistent with accepted chiropractic practice, and was not
excessive. The compensation judge found that the
treatment rendered after April 3, 1995, was not authorized
under the permanent treatment parameters of Minn. R.
5221.6200, subp. 3 and 5221.6010, subp. 2, but also found
that the treatment was an appropriate departure from the
parameters pursuant to Minn. R. 5221.6050, subp. 8D because
it decreased the employee's subjective complaints and
improved his functional status. On this basis, the
compensation judge awarded payment to Arvold Chiropractic
Clinic for...