STATE OF WISCONSIN
LABOR AND INDUSTRY REVIEW COMMISSION
P O BOX 8126, MADISON, WI 53708-8126 (608/266-9850)

MARVA HARRIS WRIGHT, Applicant

JEEP EAGLE CORPORATION, Employer

JEEP EAGLE CORPORATION, Insurer

WORKER'S COMPENSATION DECISION
Claim No. 1985-014793

The applicant submitted a petition for commission review alleging error in the administrative judge's Findings and Order issued in this matter on March 19, 2002. Briefs were submitted by the parties. At issue are: (1) whether the applicant submitted a timely petition for commission review; and (2) whether jurisdiction under Chapter 102 exists for the applicant's current claim for arachnoiditis.

The commission has carefully reviewed the entire record in this matter and hereby affirms the administrative law judge's Findings and Order. The commission adds the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

Petition for review

The department forwarded to the commission the materials it received from the applicant on March 25, 2002, and which it treated as a petition for commission review of Administrative Law Judge Sherman C. Mitchell's order issued on March 19, 2002. As counsel for the Work Injury Supplemental Benefit Fund has pointed out, these materials did not reference ALJ's Mitchell's order, nor did they address the jurisdictional issue upon which ALJ Mitchell's order was based. The postmark on the envelope in which these materials were received indicates that the applicant mailed them to the department on the same day ALJ Mitchell's order was mailed, March 19, 2002. It is therefore extremely improbable that the applicant had received ALJ Mitchell's order when she mailed these materials on March 19, 2002.

However, in a letter dated March 29, 2002, the department notified the applicant that these materials were to be treated as a petition for commission review. The applicant responded with a letter dated April 7, 2002, and received by the department on April 15, 2002, which requested a copy of the materials. The commission considers the determinative fact in this matter to be that the department informed the applicant in its letter dated March 29, 2002, that it had accepted her previously-mailed materials as a petition for review of ALJ Mitchell's decision. The department's letter was sent to the applicant 11 days prior to the deadline for receipt of a timely petition for commission review. This gave her every reason to believe that, regardless of her original intention, her correspondence had been accepted as a timely petition for review. Accordingly, the applicant's petition is accepted as timely.

The current claim

Neither in the materials received by the department on March 25, 2002, nor in subsequent correspondence received from the applicant, has she articulated a reasonable argument for reversing ALJ Mitchell's decision. As ALJ Mitchell noted, the applicant's current claim for arachnoiditis allegedly stems from treatment received for an alleged back injury she alleged occurred at work in 1983. The 1983 claim was dismissed as not work-related, and the applicant's appeals to court have been dismissed. The applicant's claim for arachnoiditis is therefore based on a medical procedure allegedly made necessary by an alleged injury which has been finally resolved as not work-related. In other words, the applicant's current claim for arachnoiditis is dependent upon a claim which was previously dismissed. Therefore, her claim for arachnoiditis must also be dismissed.

Now, therefore this

ORDER


The Findings and Order of the administrative law judge are affirmed. The application is dismissed. 

Dated and mailed May 20, 2002
harrima . wsd : 185 : 8  ND § 9.2

/s/ David B. Falstad, Chairman

/s/ James A. Rutkowski, Commissioner

/s/ Laurie R. McCallum, Commissioner

cc: 
Attorney Thomas M. Rohe
Attorney Lowell E. Nass

Appealed to Circuit Court.

[ Search Decisions ] - [ WC Legal Resources ] - [ LIRC Home Page ]

uploaded 2002/06/05