No. 00-00996 (2002). Lane v. LWD, Inc.

• Case Date: May 15, 2002
• Court: Kentucky

Kentucky Workers Compensation 2002. No. 00-00996 (2002). Lane v. LWD, Inc BENJAMIN D. LANE PETITIONER VS. LWD, INC.; RAY BLACK and SONS, INC.; ATKINSON, DILLINGHAM and LANE; WORKERS' COMPENSATION FUNDS SUCCESSOR TO SPECIAL FUND and HON. J. LANDON OVERFIELD, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE RESPONDENTSOPINION ENTERED: May 15, 2002 CLAIM NOS. 00-00996, 93-48037 and 89-13656APPEAL FROM HON. J. LANDON OVERFIELD, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE AFFIRMING * * * * * * BEFORE: LOVAN, Chairman, STANLEY and GARDNER, Members.GARDNER, Member. Petitioner, Benjamin D. Lane (Lane), appeals from a decision of Hon. J. Landon Overfield, Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), dismissing Lane's claim for income and future medical benefits. The ALJ determined Lane's condition was merely an exacerbation of earlier work-related injuries. At this point, a brief procedural history is in order. Lane sustained a cervical spine injury on August 28, 1989, while employed by respondent, LWD, Inc. (LWD). The injury consisted of a C5-6 disc herniation treated by anterior discectomy and fusion. Lane filed a workers' compensation claim that was settled in 1990 for a 15% permanent partial disability. Lane sustained a second work-related neck injury on September 22, 1993, while employed by respondent Ray Black and Sons, Inc. (Black). Lane filed a claim for a new injury, which was consolidated with a reopening of the 1990 settlement. Medical evidence demonstrated a central disc herniation at C4-5 and C6-7, with a previous fusion at C5-6. The parties entered into a compromised settlement, approved by ALJ Irene Steen on August 23, 1994. A 12.5% permanent partial disability (PPD) was apportioned between Black and the Special Fund and LWD accepted responsibility for an additional 12.5% PPD on account of a worsening on reopening. Lane sustained yet a third cervical injury on August 6, 1998, while employed by respondent Atkinson, Dillingham and Lane (ADL). This is the subject of Lane's petition for appeal. Lane filed an application for resolution of injury claim and moved to reopen the 1990 and 1994 settlements. Lane now contends his condition has occupationally worsened as a result of the 1998 injury. He complains of increasing stiffening, loss of motion and increased pain in his neck area. Lane also amended his Form 101 to include an injury to his lumbar spine and complains of pain in his low back. The medical evidence, as expected, is voluminous and comes by way of the reports, office notes, or depositions of Drs. James D. Noonan, Jesus O. Agomaa, Enrique T. Yap, Montee Rommelman, Charlene Robinson, Marshall M. Poor, Robert Meriwether, Laxmaiah Manchikanti, Gregory E. Gleis and multiple radiologists. The ALJ, in an exhaustive twenty-five page opinion, summarized the lay and medical evidence and concluded, relying on Dr. Gleis, that there was no showing of an increase in occupational disability due to Lane's condition related to the 1989 and 1993 injuries. The ALJ, again relying on Dr. Gleis, concluded that Lane failed to sustain his burden of proof that...