STACY R. SANDERSON, Employee,
v.
ARROWWOOD RADISSON RESORT/REGENCY INNS MGMT., INC., and LIBERTY MUT. INS. CO., Employer-Insurer/Appellants,
and
BROADWAY MED. CTR., BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF MINN., CENTRAL MINN. NEUROSCIENCES, MIDWAY MED. CLINIC, INSTITUTE FOR LOW BACK & NECK CARE, DOUGLAS COUNTY HOSP., CENTER FOR PAIN MGMT., P.A., INJURED WORKERS’ PHARMACY, CENTER FOR DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING, MINNESOTA DEP’T OF HUMAN SERVS./BRS, Intervenors.
No. WC11-5253
Minnesota Workers Compensation
Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals
September 21, 2011
HEADNOTES
MEDICAL
TREATMENT & EXPENSE; EVIDENCE - RES JUDICATA. The
compensation judge’s order to pay outstanding medical
bills for treatment to work injuries, excluding the specific
medical bills that had earlier been determined
non-compensable in a Decision and Order by the designee at
the Department of Labor and Industry, is not an error of law
under the doctrine of collateral estoppel.
TERMINATION
OF EMPLOYMENT - MISCONDUCT. The employee’s actions
leading to her termination did not constitute misconduct
under Minn. Stat. § 176.101, subd. 1(e)(1), so as to bar
recommencement of temporary total disability benefits.
MEDICAL
TREATMENT & EXPENSE - TREATMENT PARAMETERS; RULES
CONSTRUED - MINN. R. 5221.6200, SUBP. 6.C.(1). Substantial
evidence, including expert medical opinion, supports the
reasonableness and necessity of a trial screening of a spinal
cord stimulator. The requirements of the treatment parameters
prior to implantation of a spinal cord stimulator are not
prerequisites to a trial screening of the device.
TEMPORARY
TOTAL DISABILITY - SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. Substantial
evidence, including expert vocational opinion, the
employee’s good faith effort to participate in a
rehabilitation plan, very limiting work restrictions, and
ongoing pain symptoms, support the compensation judge’s
award of temporary total disability benefits without evidence
of a diligent job search.
Affirmed.
DeAnna
M. McCashin, Schoep & McCashin, Alexandria, MN, for the
Respondent.
Bryan
J. Chant, Law Offices of Stilp & Grove, Golden Valley,
MN, for the Appellants.
Determined by: Milun, C.J., Stofferahn, J., and Johnson, J.
Compensation Judge: Jane Gordon Ertl
OPINION
PATRICIA J. MILUN, Judge
The
employer and insurer appeal the compensation judge’s
findings that (1) the award of medical treatment expenses was
not barred by collateral estoppel, (2) the employee had not
been terminated for misconduct, (3) the employee was entitled
to a trial spinal cord stimulator, and (4) the employee was
entitled to temporary total disability benefits without
performing a job search. We affirm.
BACKGROUND
In
2004, Stacy Sanderson, the employee, began working as a
housekeeper for Arrowwood Radisson Resort, the employer,
which was insured for workers’ compensation liability
by Liberty Mutual Insurance Companies, the insurer. At that
time, the employee had no physical restrictions and she had
received no medical treatment for her low back. The employee
claims that she sustained a work injury after a slip and fall
on February 22, 2005, which she stated that she reported to a
supervisor and was told it was not compensable since it
happened while she was on a break. The employee received
chiropractic treatment from Dr. Michael Dahlquist from
February through August 19, 2005, but she did not miss any
time from work after that incident. On October 29, 2005, the
employee sustained a work-related injury to her low back
while pulling a bed away from a wall. The employer and
insurer admitted primary liability and paid temporary total
disability benefits from November 7 through November 11,
2005, and temporary partial disability benefits from November
12, 2005, through June 29, 2007.
Starting
on October 31, 2005, the employee treated with Dr. Randy
Peterson, her primary physician, at the Broadway Medical
Center. Dr. Peterson recommended physical therapy and
referred the employee to Dr. Jeffrey Gerdes at Central
Minnesota Neurosciences. A December 20, 2005, MRI indicated
mild to moderate disc desiccation at L3-4, L4-5, and L5-S1,
left foraminal herniation and annular tear at L3-4 contiguous
with the L3 ganglion nerve, left foraminal L5-S1 protrusion
that abutted the left L5 nerve, and mild facet degeneration.
Dr.
Gerdes determined that the employee was not a surgical
candidate and referred her to Dr. Leslie Hillman, a
physiatrist at the same location. Dr. Hillman examined the
employee on Feruary 20, 2006, diagnosed bilateral lower
extremity and low back pain, right SI joint dysfunction and
pain, bilateral trochantri bursitis, and a gait disorder, and
recommended physical therapy and medication. On April 26,
2006, Dr. Hillman indicated that the employee’s work
restrictions included no lifting over ten pounds and not
working more than two days in row. On August 14, 2006, the
employee’s restrictions were changed to include a
restriction of working two hours per day. In October 2006,
Dr. Hillman recommended that the employee’s hours be
increased fifteen minutes per day until she reached four
hours per day. Dr. Hillman referred the employee to the
Center for Pain Management. Between March 22, 2006, and April
7, 2008, Dr. Sam Elghor at the Center for Pain Management
treated the employee with injections and rhizotomies several
times for her pain symptoms.
The
employee was assigned a QRC, Tod Paulson, in April 2006, and
continued to work in a modified position with the employer
through 2006 and part of 2007. Dr. Elghor took the employee
off work from June 7 through June 18, 2007, for recovery
after injections. Dr. Hillman requested an on-site job
evaluation of the employee’s work activities, which was
denied. In early July 2007, the employee missed work for
several days due to a relative’s death and funeral. The
employee told the QRC that she was unable to return to work
for three weeks in July 2007 because of her leg pain and
swelling. On August 3, 2007, the employer terminated her
employment. No further wage loss benefits were paid. The QRC
testified that he understood that the employee’s
employment was terminated since the employer could no longer
offer her work within her restrictions. The employee’s
supervisor testified that the employee was terminated since
she did not show up for work or call several times, in
violation of the employer’s policy. The supervisor also
testified that the employer’s policy allowed
termination after three absences without calling. Multiple
rehabilitation plan amendments through 2007 and 2008 indicate
that the QRC was providing medical management services and
did...
