Robert Fugate v. Elite Coal Services, LLC ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                               STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA
    SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS
    FILED
    ROBERT FUGATE,                                                                       May 5, 2017
    RORY L. PERRY II, CLERK
    Claimant Below, Petitioner                                                   SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS
    OF WEST VIRGINIA
    vs.)   No. 16-0580	 (BOR Appeal No. 2050984)
    (Claim No. 201403311)
    ELITE COAL SERVICES, LLC,
    Employer Below, Respondent
    MEMORANDUM DECISION
    Petitioner Robert Fugate, by Reginald Henry, his attorney, appeals the decision of the
    West Virginia Workers’ Compensation Board of Review. Elite Coal Services, LLC, by
    Katherine Arritt and Jeffrey Brannon, its attorneys, filed a timely response.
    The issues presented in the instant appeal are the closure of Mr. Fugate’s claim on a
    temporary total disability basis; the denial of a request for authorization of an office visit with
    David Lynch, M.D.; the denial of authorization for the prescription medications Norco and
    Lodine; and the denial of a request to add a bulging lumbar disc and an annular tear of a lumbar
    disc as compensable components of Mr. Fugate’s claim for workers’ compensation benefits. On
    February 10, 2015, the claims administrator closed Mr. Fugate’s claim on a temporary total
    disability basis. Additionally, on April 6, 2015, the claims administrator denied a request for
    authorization of an office visit with Dr. Lynch, and also denied a request for authorization of the
    prescription medications Norco and Lodine. Finally, on May 6, 2015, the claims administrator
    denied a request to add a bulging lumbar disc and an annular tear of a lumbar disc as
    compensable components of the claim. The Office of Judges affirmed the February 10, 2015;
    April 6, 2015; and May 6, 2015, decisions of the claims administrator in its Order dated
    December 4, 2015. This appeal arises from the Board of Review’s Final Order dated May 20,
    2016, in which the Board affirmed the December 4, 2015, Order of the Workers’ Compensation
    Office of Judges. The Court has carefully reviewed the records, written arguments, and
    appendices contained in the briefs, and the case is mature for consideration.
    This Court has considered the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal. The facts and legal
    arguments are adequately presented, and the decisional process would not be significantly aided
    by oral argument. Upon consideration of the standard of review, the briefs, and the record
    presented, the Court finds no substantial question of law and no prejudicial error. For these
    1
    reasons, a memorandum decision is appropriate under Rule 21 of the Rules of Appellate
    Procedure.
    Mr. Fugate sustained a lower back injury during the course of his employment with Elite
    Coal Services while lifting a large piece of equipment on July 12, 2013. Mr. Fugate’s application
    for workers’ compensation benefits was held compensable for a lumbar sprain on August 2,
    2013. A lumbar spine MRI performed on August 9, 2013, revealed a mild disc bulge at L4-5.
    Mr. Fugate was examined by neurologist Robert Crow, M.D., on September 4, 2013. Dr.
    Crow noted that Mr. Fugate complained of back and leg pain, and diagnosed Mr. Fugate with
    lumbago. Dr. Crow reviewed the August 9, 2013, MRI and opined that a surgically remedial
    lesion is not present. On December 6, 2013, orthopedic surgeon Sanford Emery, M.D., reviewed
    Mr. Fugate’s medical record. Dr. Emery opined that the diagnostic imaging available for review
    was within normal limits and recommended that Mr. Fugate undergo a course of physical
    therapy. On February 26, 2014, Mr. Fugate was evaluated by orthopedic surgeon David Lynch,
    M.D. Dr. Lynch also reviewed the August 9, 2013, MRI and opined that it is an unremarkable
    study. He further opined that the mild disc bulge revealed via the MRI is non-surgical in nature.
    Dr. Lynch diagnosed Mr. Fugate with a lumbosacral sprain.
    Mr. Fugate sought treatment with Andrew Thymius, D.O., for ongoing lower back pain
    on April 22, 2014. Dr. Thymius diagnosed a lumbar strain, lumbar facet arthropathy, lumbar
    facet joint pain, and degenerative disc disease. He prescribed the medications Norco and Lodine
    for the treatment of Mr. Fugate’s ongoing lower back pain. A second lumbar spine MRI was
    performed on July 18, 2014. The impression was stable degenerative disc disease at L4-5, with a
    mild disc protrusion at L4-5 which is unchanged in comparison with the August 9, 2013, study.
    Additionally, an electromyogram performed on July 30, 2014, did not reveal any evidence of
    radiculopathy. However, during a follow-up visit on December 10, 2014, Dr. Thymius opined
    that the MRI performed on July 18, 2014, revealed evidence of a worsening disc herniation at
    L4-5 when compared with the August 9, 2013, study. Dr. Thymius then diagnosed Mr. Fugate
    with a herniated nucleus pulposus at L4-5 and an annular disc tear.
    Paul Bachwitt, M.D., performed an independent medical evaluation on January 29, 2015,
    and authored a report memorializing his findings on February 3, 2014. Dr. Bachwitt diagnosed
    Mr. Fugate with a lumbar sprain/strain. He opined that Mr. Fugate’s medical record does not
    contain any evidence indicating the presence of an operable disc lesion. He further noted that his
    examination did not reveal any evidence of lumbar radiculopathy. Dr. Bachwitt then opined that
    Mr. Fugate has reached maximum medical improvement, that his treatment to date has well
    exceeded the treatment guidelines set forth in West Virginia Code of State Rules § 85-20 (2006),
    and that he is in no further need of treatment in relation to the compensable injury.
    On February 10, 2015, the claims administrator closed Mr. Fugate’s claim on a temporary
    total disability basis.1 On April 6, 2015, the claims administrator denied a request for
    authorization of a second office visit with Dr. Lynch, and also denied authorization for the
    1
    The record does not clearly define Mr. Fugate’s prior period of temporary total disability
    2
    medications Norco and Lodine. On May 6, 2015, the claims administrator denied a request to
    add a bulging lumbar disc and an annular tear of a lumbar disc as compensable diagnoses.
    Finally, Prasadarao Mukkamala, M.D., performed an independent medical evaluation on
    September 17, 2015, and authored a report memorializing his findings on September 18, 2015.
    Dr. Mukkamala opined that the claims administrator’s denial of the request to add a bulging
    lumbar disc and an annular tear of a lumbar disc as compensable diagnoses was appropriate
    because the diagnoses represent naturally occurring degenerative conditions which are unrelated
    to the compensable lumbar sprain. He further opined that Mr. Fugate has reached maximum
    medical improvement and requires no further treatment, including office visits with Dr. Lynch
    and the use of the medications Norco and Lodine. Specifically, he noted that Mr. Fugate
    underwent a course of physical therapy. He then opined that the continued use of the medications
    Norco and Lodine is not currently justified for the treatment of a two-year-old soft tissue injury.
    The Office of Judges affirmed the February 10, 2015; April 6, 2015; and May 6, 2015,
    claims administrator’s decisions. The Board of Review affirmed the reasoning and conclusions
    of the Office of Judges in its decision dated May 20, 2016. On appeal, Mr. Fugate asserts that the
    evidence of record clearly demonstrates that a bulging lumbar disc and an annular tear of a
    lumbar disc should be added as compensable components of the claim. He further asserts that
    because the diagnoses at issue should be added as compensable components of the claim, he is
    entitled to treatment for these diagnoses to include an additional office visit with Dr. Lynch and
    authorization for the use of the medications Norco and Lodine.
    Regarding the request to add a bulging lumbar disc and an annular tear of a lumbar disc
    as compensable components of the claim, the Office of Judges found that only Dr. Thymius
    interpreted the results of the July 18, 2014, MRI as showing evidence of progression of the mild
    L4-5 disc bulge when compared with the August 9, 2013, study. The Office of Judges further
    found that Dr. Thymius’s conclusion that there has been a progression of the L4-5 disc bulge
    constitutes the basis for the request to add a bulging lumbar disc and an annular tear of a lumbar
    disc as compensable diagnoses. As was noted by the Office of Judges, all other physicians of
    record found the diagnostic imaging of record to be unremarkable. Moreover, the radiologist
    who interpreted the July 18, 2014, MRI specifically stated that the findings are unchanged in
    comparison with the August 9, 2013, study. Finally, Dr. Mukkamala found that the mild L4-5
    disc bulge is representative of degenerative changes and is unrelated to the July 12, 2013, injury.
    Regarding the request for additional medical treatment, the Office of Judges found that
    authorization for the treatment at issue was properly denied because the treatment was aimed at
    treating symptoms arising from the L4-5 disc herniation which, as was previously discussed, is
    not a compensable component of the claim. Finally, regarding the closure of the claim for
    temporary total disability benefits, the Office of Judges determined that the request stems from
    Dr. Thymius’s diagnosis and ongoing treatment of an L4-5 disc herniation, which is not a
    compensable diagnosis. Moreover, West Virginia Code § 23-4-7a (2005), provides that
    temporary total disability benefits are not payable after a claimant has reached maximum
    medical improvement, is released to return to work, or actually returns to work, whichever
    occurs first. Both Dr. Bachwitt and Dr. Mukkamala found that Mr. Fugate has reached maximum
    3
    medical improvement and, therefore, he is not eligible for additional temporary total disability
    benefits.
    For the foregoing reasons, we find that the decision of the Board of Review is not in clear
    violation of any constitutional or statutory provision, nor is it clearly the result of erroneous
    conclusions of law, nor is it based upon a material misstatement or mischaracterization of the
    evidentiary record. Therefore, the decision of the Board of Review is affirmed.
    Affirmed.
    ISSUED: May 5, 2017
    CONCURRED IN BY:
    Chief Justice Allen H. Loughry II
    Justice Robin J. Davis
    Justice Margaret L. Workman
    Justice Menis E. Ketchum
    Justice Elizabeth D. Walker
    4
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16-0580

Filed Date: 5/5/2017

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 5/5/2017