No. 1,012,947. THOMAS MICHAEL TICE VS. CHRIS BLAYLOCK STUCCO.

Case Date:October 29, 2010
Court:Kansas
 
FREE EXCERPT
Kansas Workers Compensation 2010. No. 1,012,947. THOMAS MICHAEL TICE VS. CHRIS BLAYLOCK STUCCO October 29, 2010BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARDFOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATIONDocket No. 1,012,947THOMAS MICHAEL TICE Claimant VS.CHRIS BLAYLOCK STUCCO Respondent ANDPETROSURANCE CASUALTY CO. Insurance Carrier ORDER Claimant requested review of the January 24, 2006 Award by Administrative Law Judge John D. Clark. The Board heard oral argument on May 19, 2006. Appearances Joseph Seiwert of Wichita, Kansas, appeared for the claimant. Kirby A. Vernon of Wichita, Kansas, appeared for respondent and its insurance carrier. Record and Stipulations The Board has considered the record and adopted the stipulations listed in the Award. Issues The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) determined that as a result of the May 4, 2000 accident, claimant suffered an 84 percent task loss and a 100 percent wage loss which combined for a 92 percent work disability. The claimant requests the Board review the ALJ's denial of his request for permanent total disability benefits. Claimant maintains he met his evidentiary burden and has established that he is "essentially and realistically unemployable" and is entitled to compensation for permanent total disability. Claimant argues his physical restrictions alone eliminate his ability to engage in substantial gainful employment. Although respondent disagrees with the ALJ's finding regarding the percentage of claimant's wage loss, nonetheless, respondent concedes that even if its argued percentage of wage loss is adopted, claimant is still entitled to the $100,000 maximum compensation payable for a permanent partial disability as a result of his work disability. But respondent argues that claimant's physical restrictions do not prevent him from engaging in substantial and gainful employment. Consequently, respondent argues claimant is not permanently and totally disabled and the ALJ's finding claimant is permanently partially disabled should be affirmed. The sole issue before the Board is whether claimant is permanently and totally disabled as defined by K.S.A. 44-510c(a)(2). Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Having reviewed the evidentiary record filed herein, the stipulations of the parties, and having considered the parties' briefs and oral arguments, the Board makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: Claimant was injured when he slipped and fell while carrying a bag of cement. He injured his right knee and was provided treatment which included two arthroscopic procedures. An osteotomy was next performed but claimant developed an infection which ultimately resulted in removal of the hardware. Finally, claimant underwent a total right knee replacement. Although this procedure somewhat reduced his knee pain, it is significant that claimant developed a deep venous thrombosis of his femoral artery which required hospitalization where he was placed on anticoagulants. The claimant's deep vein thrombosis has become chronic and claimant remains on Coumadin and his edema is treated with diuretics, elevation and a compression stocking. After the knee replacement claimant developed back problems caused by an altered gait as a result of the injury. It is undisputed that claimant's back problems as well as the deep vein thrombosis are a direct consequence of the May 4, 2000 work-related accident. Dr...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP