ROBERT E. STULEN, Employee,
v.
HALVORSON CO., INC., and UNITED FIRE & CASUALTY INS. CO., Employer-Insurer/Appellants,
and
BLUE CROSS & BLUE SHIELD OF MINN., Intervenor.
Minnesota Workers Compensation
Workers' Compensation Court of Appeals
April 6, 1999
HEADNOTES
CAUSATION
- INTERVENING CAUSE; CAUSATION - MEDICAL
TREATMENT. Substantial evidence supports the
compensation judge's determination that the
employee's activities on September 21 and 22, 1997 were
not a superseding, intervening cause, and the employee's
need for medical treatment was causally related to his
admitted 1983 work injury.
EVIDENCE
- RES JUDICATA. The compensation judge erred in finding
this court's prior decision on May 22, 1996 was res
judicata on the issue of whether the permanent treatment
parameters barred compensation for chiropractic and massage
therapy expenses, where the current claim involved a
different period of time, and different sections of the
permanent treatment parameters were raised and argued.
MEDICAL
TREATMENT & EXPENSE - TREATMENT
PARAMETERS. Substantial evidence supports the
compensation judge's finding that the chiropractic and
therapeutic massage treatment rendered was medically
necessary within the meaning of Minn. R. 5221.6200, subp.
3.B.(2) of the permanent treatment parameters.
Affirmed
in part and vacated in part.
Determined by Johnson, J., Wheeler, C.J., and Pederson, J.
Compensation Judge: Jennifer Patterson
OPINION
THOMAS
L. JOHNSON, Judge
The
employer and insurer appeal the compensation judge's
finding that the employee's activities on September 22,
1996 were not a superseding, intervening cause of the
employee's subsequent need for medical
treatment. The employer and insurer also appeal the
compensation judge's award of chiropractic and
therapeutic massage treatment after July 12, 1996. We
affirm, in part, and vacate, in part.
BACKGROUND
Robert
E. Stulen, the employee, sustained an injury to his low back
on December 7, 1983, while working for Halvorson Company,
Inc., the employer, then insured by United Fire &
Casualty Insurance Company. The employer and insurer
accepted liability for the employee's injury and paid
workers' compensation benefits. During the following
years, the employee experienced periodic flare-ups of low
back pain for which he sought chiropractic care. An MRI
scan in October 1991 showed degenerative disc changes in the
three lower lumbar levels, with a central protrusion or
herniation at L3-4 and a bulging disc at L4-5.
On
August 10, 1994, the employee saw his treating chiropractor,
Jennifer A. Heveron, D.C., at Greenlake Chiropractic
complaining of increased low back pain. Thereafter, the
employee treated as needed with Dr. Heveron. An MRI scan
taken on October 12, 1994 again showed three-level
degenerative disc disease with a mild right-sided protruding
disc at L4-5 and a mild central bulging disc at
L3-4. The employee was also tested and evaluated at the
Mayo Clinic.
The
employee filed a medical request in February 1995 seeking
payment for medical and chiropractic treatment from and after
August 10, 1994. In a Findings and Order served and
filed September 1, 1995, the compensation judge ordered the
employer and insurer to pay the employee's outstanding
expenses at Greenlake Chiropractic. The employer and
insurer appealed the award of chiropractic expenses to the
Workers' Compensation Court of Appeals. The
appellants argued the chiropractic treatment was barred by
the permanent treatment parameters, specifically Minn. R.
5221.6600.1 In a decision filed May 22, 1996,
a panel of this court affirmed the award of chiropractic
expenses through August 17, 1995, the date of the hearing
before the compensation judge, affirming the judge's
finding that the contested chiropractic treatment was outside
the purview of Minn. R. 5221.6600.2 Stulen v.
Halvorson Co., Inc., slip op. (W.C.C.A. May 22, 1996).
On
September 21, 1996, the employee bent over to pick up a
wrench and heard or felt a pop in his low back. (T.
67-68.) The following day the employee and his family
took their pontoon boat out on Green Lake in Spicer,
Minnesota. The employee drove his truck and boat trailer
carrying the pontoon boat to the boat ramp at the
lake. He backed the trailer into the water and unhooked
the boat. The boat then floated free. After the
boat ride, the employee performed the same procedure in
reverse. As the employee was driving away, he noticed a
couple that was having difficulty pulling their boat out of
the water. The employee offered to help by attaching a
chain to the other car to...
