Cosby v. Alpha Natural Resources, Inc ( 2021 )


Menu:
  •                                                                              FILED
    November 5, 2021
    EDYTHE NASH GAISER, CLERK
    SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS
    OF WEST VIRGINIA
    STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA
    SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS
    ANTHONY O. COSBY,
    Claimant Below, Petitioner
    vs.)   No. 20-0719 (BOR Appeal No. 2055163)
    (Claim No. 2014003420)
    ALPHA NATURAL RESOURCES, INC.,
    Employer Below, Respondent
    MEMORANDUM DECISION
    Petitioner Anthony O. Cosby, by counsel Patrick K. Maroney, appeals the decision of the
    West Virginia Workers’ Compensation Board of Review (“Board of Review”). Alpha Natural
    Resources, Inc., by counsel H. Dill Battle III, filed a timely response.
    The issue on appeal is the amount of permanent partial disability in the claim. The claims
    administrator granted no permanent partial disability award in an Order dated February 2, 2017.
    On February 11, 2020, the Workers’ Compensation Office of Judges (“Office of Judges”)
    affirmed the claims administrator’s decision. This appeal arises from the Board of Review’s
    Order dated August 20, 2020, in which the Board affirmed the Order of the Office of Judges.
    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
    reasons, a memorandum decision is appropriate under Rule 21 of the Rules of Appellate
    Procedure.
    The standard of review applicable to this Court’s consideration of workers’ compensation
    appeals has been set out under 
    W. Va. Code § 23-5-15
    , in relevant part, as follows:
    (b) In reviewing a decision of the board of review, the supreme court of
    appeals shall consider the record provided by the board and give deference
    to the board’s findings, reasoning and conclusions.
    1
    (c) If the decision of the board represents an affirmation of a prior
    ruling by both the commission and the office of judges that was entered on
    the same issue in the same claim, the decision of the board may be reversed
    or modified by the Supreme Court of Appeals only if the decision is in clear
    violation of Constitutional or statutory provision, is clearly the result of
    erroneous conclusions of law, or is based upon the board’s material
    misstatement or mischaracterization of particular components of the
    evidentiary record. The court may not conduct a de novo re-weighing of the
    evidentiary record.
    See Hammons v. W. Va. Off. of Ins. Comm’r, 
    235 W. Va. 577
    , 582-83, 
    775 S.E.2d 458
    , 463-64
    (2015). As we previously recognized in Justice v. West Virginia Office Insurance Commission,
    
    230 W. Va. 80
    , 83, 
    736 S.E.2d 80
    , 83 (2012), we apply a de novo standard of review to questions
    of law arising in the context of decisions issued by the Board. See also Davies v. W. Va. Off. of
    Ins. Comm’r, 
    227 W. Va. 330
    , 334, 
    708 S.E.2d 524
    , 528 (2011).
    Mr. Cosby injured his right shoulder in the course of his employment on May 16, 2013,
    when he fell off of a beltline and tried to catch himself with his right arm. As a result, he pulled
    and strained his right shoulder. By Order of the claims administrator dated September 10, 2013, a
    modified compensability ruling was issued holding the claim compensable on a no lost time
    basis for the condition of right shoulder sprain/strain. The claims administrator declined to add
    the diagnoses of complete rupture of rotator cuff, osteoarthritis, and lumbar sprain/strain to the
    claim.
    The medical record indicates that Mr. Cosby had advanced right shoulder degenerative
    disease prior to the compensable incident on May 16, 2013. He injured his right shoulder on July
    25, 2011, and x-rays revealed moderate glenohumeral and acromioclavicular joint arthropathy
    with marginal spurring of the inferior distal clavicle, acromion, and inferior medial humeral
    head. A right shoulder MRI on September 30, 2011, showed increased signal in the
    supraspinatus, representing tendinopathy or a partial thickness tear. There were degenerative
    changes at the acromioclavicular joint and glenohumeral joint with some cartilaginous thinning
    and subchondral marrow signal change, as well as fluid in the subacromial bursa and deep to the
    supraspinatus muscle. He underwent extensive treatment, physical therapy, and injections with
    Bone and Joint Surgeons. Clark D. Adkins, M.D., diagnosed Mr. Cosby with shoulder
    osteoarthritis and rotator cuff rupture on December 13, 2012.
    Peter J. Lukowski, M.D., performed right shoulder surgery on July 24, 2013, two months
    after the compensable incident. The surgery performed was a long head biceps tenotomy and
    debridement of a superior labral tear. The superior labral tear that was debrided was described as
    “chronic looking.” Dr. Lukowski also considered performing a biceps tenodesis, but the
    procedure was ruled out based upon Mr. Cosby’s age and the degree of arthritic changes seen in
    the shoulder. On February 18, 2014, Dr. Lukowski noted that some of the severe glenohumeral
    degenerative changes he saw when he operated were seen radiographically in May 2013, prior to
    the compensable incident. Mr. Cosby had recovered from right shoulder surgery, and he was
    doing well until he returned to work in the late fall. New x-rays showed further narrowing of the
    2
    glenohumeral joint, especially inferiorly. Dr. Lukowski concluded that most of Mr. Cosby’s pain
    is coming from degenerative joint disease of his glenohumeral joint.
    Mr. Cosby followed-up with Dr. Lukowski on July 8, 2014, for his right shoulder pain.
    Dr. Lukowski noted severe degenerative joint disease of the right shoulder. Although he had
    received periodic palliative injections in the past, his last injection was in February 2014. It was
    noted that Mr. Cosby continues to work in a heavy manual labor job which exacerbates his
    shoulder problems. The assessment was osteoarthritis of the shoulder, and the plan of treatment
    was 80 mg Depo-Medrol given into the glenohumeral joint with future treatment as needed. The
    joint was injected, and Mr. Cosby was advised to seek employment positions outside of the
    manual labor work category.
    On December 5, 2016, Mr. Cosby was seen by Dr. Adkins for right shoulder pain. It was
    noted that activity bothers his lateral shoulder and anterior shoulder. He stated that he was able to
    perform at the heavy work level, which he tolerated with difficulty. Dr. Adkins considered the
    symptoms to be due more to glenohumeral arthritis. Nonsurgical options were discussed, and Mr.
    Cosby was released to return to work on November 22, 2016.
    Mr. Cosby was evaluated by Prasadarao B. Mukkamala, M.D., on January 12, 2017,
    where he complained of right shoulder soreness and weakness, but stated that he was able to
    carry on his daily life activities without restrictions. In a report dated January 13, 2017, Dr.
    Mukkamala diagnosed Mr. Cosby with a right shoulder sprain. He opined that his current
    complaints are causally related to preexisting, non-work related arthrosis. Dr. Mukkamala noted
    that he had a prior injury to the right shoulder and that the MRI of the right shoulder performed
    on June 18, 2013, revealed significant degenerative changes and evidence of acromioclavicular
    joint degenerative disease. There was evidence of degenerative subchondral cysts with suspected
    adjacent tearing of the glenoid labrum along the inferior aspect of the glenoid labrum and
    degenerative chondrosis of the humeral head. There was partial thickness tearing of the
    supraspinatus and tendinopathy/partial thickness tear of the infraspinatus tendon. Dr. Mukkamala
    stated all those findings were degenerative in nature and preexisting. Using the American
    Medical Association’s Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (4th ed. 1993), Dr.
    Mukkamala found 1% whole person impairment for upper extremity impairment. However, Dr.
    Mukkamala apportioned the impairment and allocated 1% to preexisting conditions. He
    concluded that Mr. Cosby does not have any permanent impairment resulting from the
    compensable injury in this claim.
    By Order of the claims administrator dated February 2, 2017, Mr. Cosby was granted no
    permanent partial disability award based on the Independent Medical Evaluation of Dr.
    Mukkamala. The claim was closed for permanent partial disability benefits. Mr. Cosby protested
    the claims administrator’s decision.
    In an Independent Medical Evaluation report dated January 16, 2019, Bruce A.
    Guberman, M.D., concluded that Mr. Cosby has right shoulder symptoms with intermittent
    treatment prior to his compensable injury, after which the symptoms became more severe and he
    could no longer perform the heavy work of his job. It was noted that Mr. Cosby continued to
    3
    have pain tenderness, range of motion abnormalities, and weakness following surgery. Dr.
    Guberman found upper extremity impairment of 3% for 140° of flexion, 2% for 130° of
    extension, and 2% for 60° of internal rotation, which equated to 7% upper extremity impairment
    or 4% whole person impairment. Dr. Guberman acknowledged the preexisting degenerative
    changes and listed the range of motion abnormalities in the left shoulder as being 1% whole
    person impairment. Dr. Guberman opined that the only objective method to quantify preexisting
    impairment for the right shoulder is to assume that Mr. Cosby would have had the same 1%
    whole person impairment found in the left shoulder. He noted that this was the same amount
    apportioned by Dr. Mukkamala. Therefore, Dr. Guberman allocated 1% whole person
    impairment to the preexisting conditions and 3% whole person impairment to the compensable
    injury of May 16, 2013.
    An Independent Medical Evaluation report of Marsha Bailey, M.D., dated September 23,
    2019, found that Mr. Cosby’s most significant complaint was loss of strength in his dominant
    right upper extremity and constant right shoulder pain. Dr. Bailey stated that his current
    complaints are solely the result of his severe, preexisting, and unrelated right shoulder
    osteoarthritis and degenerative joint disease. Dr. Bailey found upper extremity impairment of 8%
    for the right shoulder that coverts to 5% whole person impairment. She then apportioned the
    entire 5% whole person impairment as preexisting and unrelated right shoulder osteoarthritis and
    degenerative joint disease. Dr. Bailey supported her allocation determination by noting that Dr.
    Lukowski himself characterized the changes as severe degenerative findings. She disputed Dr.
    Guberman’s rationale in regard to apportionment and noted that he used the impairment in the
    uninjured left shoulder as a basis for apportioning an equivalent impairment out of the
    compensable right shoulder injury. Dr. Bailey stated that the flaw in Dr. Guberman’s
    methodology is that he failed to account for the preexisting right shoulder injury of July 25,
    2011. She explained that Dr. Guberman’s apportionment method would be appropriate if Mr.
    Cosby had a normal right shoulder at the time of his compensable injury; however, this was not
    the case.
    In a decision dated February 11, 2020, the Office of Judges affirmed the February 2,
    2017, Order of the claims administrator which granted Mr. Cosby no permanent partial disability
    award. The Office of Judges found Dr. Bailey’s report to be the most persuasive medical
    evidence regarding both whole person impairment and apportionment. She found that Mr. Cosby
    has no whole person impairment due to the injury in this claim. On August 20, 2020, the Board
    of Review adopted the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the Office of Judges and
    affirmed its decision to affirm the claims administrator’s grant of no additional permanent partial
    disability award.
    After review, we agree with the decision of the Office of Judges, as affirmed by the
    Board of Review. The Office of Judges determined that Dr. Bailey used the correct methodology
    when she apportioned Mr. Cosby’s preexisting impairment. Dr. Guberman’s opinion was
    properly determined to be less credible because his apportionment methodology failed to fully
    account for the contribution of all factors to Mr. Cosby’s impairment. The medical evidence of
    record indicates that Mr. Cosby failed to establish that he is entitled to any greater permanent
    partial disability award in this claim.
    4
    Affirmed.
    ISSUED: November 5, 2021
    CONCURRED IN BY:
    Chief Justice Evan H. Jenkins
    Justice Elizabeth D. Walker
    Justice Tim Armstead
    Justice John A. Hutchison
    Justice William R. Wooton
    5
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 20-0719

Filed Date: 11/5/2021

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2021