SUSAN M. THOMPSON, Employee/Appellant,
v.
ELECTRIC CORDS, INC., and AMERICAN COMPENSATION INS. CO./RTW, INC., Employer-Insurer.
Minnesota Workers Compensation
Workers' Compensation Court of Appeals
February 8, 1999
HEADNOTES
TEMPORARY
TOTAL DISABILITY - JOB SEARCH. Substantial evidence,
including the limited number and nature of the employee's
job contacts, supports the finding that the employee's
job search was not reasonable or diligent and that the
employee is not entitled to temporary total disability
benefits.
TEMPORARY
TOTAL DISABILITY - SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. The denial of
temporary total disability benefits is reversed as the
findings and order were clearly erroneous and manifestly
contrary to the evidence in finding that the employee was
able to return to work immediately following her
surgery. The overwhelming weight of the evidence
supports the fact that the employee had not been released to
work as of the date of the hearing herein and is entitled to
temporary total benefits for a certain period of time.
Affirmed
in part and reversed in part.
Determined by Hefte, J., Wilson, J., and Wheeler, C.J.
Compensation Judge: James R. Otto
OPINION
RICHARD C. HEFTE, Judge
The
employee appeals from the compensation judge's denial of
the employee's claims for temporary total disability
benefits for the periods of time from May 22, 1996 to May 4,
1998, the day of the employee's carpal tunnel surgery;
and from May 4, 1998 to the date of the hearing herein, June
3, 1998. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
BACKGROUND
Susan
M. Thompson, employee, initially claimed a
Gillette-type1 work injury to her right arm in the
nature of carpal tunnel syndrome, culminating on April 24,
1996, when she was working for Electric Cords, Inc., the
employer.
On May
10, 1996, the employee began treatment with Dr. J. Craig
Paulson, an orthopedist. She was diagnosed as having
symptoms and signs of mild carpal tunnel syndrome on the
right. During May 1996 she continued to complain of pain
in her right forearm and wrist and Dr. Paulson restricted the
employee in the use of her right hand. Dr. Paulson
watched a video of the employee mowing her lawn and although
she was predominantly using her left hand, the doctor
reported on June 7, 1996 that she was obligated to attempt to
return to work, as the work was within her
restrictions. The employer offered the employee various
jobs which were refused by the employee. In September
1996 Dr. Paulson reported that the employee was a reasonable
candidate for carpal tunnel release surgery, although he
reported "the risks of surgery are increased, I believe,
because of the attending emotional overlay." Dr.
Chris Tountas saw the employee for the purpose of an
independent medical examination (IME). Dr. Tountas, in
his report of September 12, 1996, noted a lack of classical
symptoms associated with carpal tunnel syndrome, and
indicated the prognosis was guarded as he felt the
employee's complaints were exaggerated. He did not
recommend surgery and found no basis for any work restriction
of the employee. (Er. Ex. 15.)
The
employee filed a claim petition seeking temporary total
disability benefits from May 22, 1996 and thereafter,
approval of right carpal tunnel surgery, rehabilitation
assistance, and payment of certain medical expenses incurred
by the employee. By the date of the hearing, it had been
stipulated that the employee sustained a work-related injury
to her right upper extremity on April 24, 1996. The
compensation judge issued his findings and order on September
15, 1997 determining that the employee was not entitled to
temporary total disability benefits from May 22, 1996 to the
date of the hearing because the employee was able to work and
she unreasonably refused several offers of gainful employment
by the employer. Also, the compensation judge found that
the employee was entitled to a rehabilitation consultation,
reimbursement of certain medical expenses, and was entitled
to have carpal tunnel surgery as a result of her work
injury. The employee appealed the denial of temporary
total disability benefits and the employer and insurer
cross-appealed the determination regarding the employee's...
