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

KARRIE LARSEN, Applicant

IN SINK ERATOR, Employer

EMERSON ELECTRIC COMPANY, Insurer

WORKER'S COMPENSATION DECISION
Claim No. 2003-045008

The respondent submitted a petition for commission review alleging error in the administrative law judge's Findings and Interlocutory Order issued in this matter on April 7, 2005. The applicant submitted an answer to the petition and briefs were submitted by the parties. At issue are whether the applicant sustained compensable injuries to her left wrist and/or left elbow; and if so, what are the nature and extent of disability and liability for medical expense.

The commission has carefully reviewed the entire record in this matter and hereby affirms the administrative law judge's Findings and Interlocutory Order, except as herewith modified:

MODIFIED FINDINGS OF FACT


Delete the fifth sentence of the second paragraph on page 3 of the administrative law judge's decision and substitute the following sentences therefor:

"The applicant had mixed results from the carpal tunnel surgery. Dr. Trotter noted on March 19, 2004, that the applicant's symptoms had improved, but that she had developed a symptom of left thumb numbness. Dr. Trotter also noted that there had been significant carpal tunnel syndrome in the applicant's left wrist."

Delete the second paragraph on page 4 of the administrative law judge's decision and substitute the following paragraph therefor:

"Dr. Trotter's surgical note reveals that he did find it necessary to decompress the median nerve at the left wrist, and his postsurgical clinic notes verify that he diagnosed 'significant carpal tunnel syndrome' in that wrist. His opinion that the applicant's work activities for the employer were a materially contributory causative factor in the onset or progression of this condition is accepted as credible."

The rest and remainder of the administrative law judge's FINDINGS OF FACT are affirmed and reiterated as if set forth herein.

NOW, THEREFORE, this

INTERLOCUTORY ORDER


The Findings and Interlocutory Order of the administrative law judge are modified to conform with the foregoing, and as modified are affirmed. Jurisdiction is reserved for such further findings and orders as may be warranted.

Dated and mailed September 15, 2005
larseka . wpr : 185 : 8 ND § 5.50

/s/ James T. Flynn, Chairman

/s/ David B. Falstad, Commissioner

/s/ Robert Glaser, Commissioner

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In the petition, the respondent argues that the applicant never had carpal tunnel syndrome, and that her work activities "caused symptoms" of her supracondylar process anomaly, but did not cause a compensable aggravation of that congenital condition. The commission rejects both these contentions.

Dr. Trotter's surgical notes very clearly describe decompression of the median nerve in the left wrist, and both his preoperative and postoperative diagnoses were left carpal tunnel syndrome. In his clinic note of March 19, 2004, he credibly described the condition he treated as "significant carpal tunnel syndrome." Dr. Daley indicated that he was "not sure" whether the applicant ever had carpal tunnel syndrome, and Dr. Siegert conceded that the applicant had "minimal carpal tunnel syndrome," but opined that her elbow condition was the source of all her preoperative symptoms. The commission considered each of these opinions and found Dr. Trotter's opinion credible. He observed median nerve compression during the left wrist surgery, and it is credible that at least some of the applicant's preoperative left wrist symptoms were attributable to her work-related carpal tunnel syndrome.

The respondent argues that the applicant's supracondylar process anomaly was merely brought to the physicians' attention by the elbow symptoms caused by the work activity, and attempts to analogize this case to City of Wauwatosa v. LIRC, 110 Wis. 2d 298, 328 N.W.2d 882 (1982). However, in City of Wauwatosa the work incident was found to have caused a condition (hip capsulitis) separate from the congenital condition (dysplastic hip) that necessitated the surgery. In the applicant's case there was only one elbow condition, and as credibly opined by Dr. Daley on March 3, 2005, the applicant's work activities with the employer were "at least a cause in the progression" of that elbow condition. Respondent additionally argues that Dr. Dailey's use of this quoted phrase does not reach the level of a reasonable degree of medical probability. The commission disagrees. It is evident from his opinion that Dr. Dailey believed the applicant's work activities played a substantial causative role in the applicant's elbow condition "for which [he] performed surgery on October 4, 2004." (See Applicant's Exhibit H, in which Dr. Dailey makes this statement).

Finally, respondent alleges that the administrative law judge evinced bias in favor of the applicant by asking leading questions, being overly solicitous of the applicant, telling inappropriate jokes, and "advocating" for the applicant's attorney to obtain his fee. The commission reviewed the transcript of the hearing and found no substance to the allegation of bias. While the administrative law judge did ask some leading questions, they were designed to elicit information from an objective viewpoint. He was polite but not solicitous of the applicant, his joke telling revealed no evidence of bias, and he merely made certain that the attorney fee agreement was entered into the record.

cc:
Attorney Daniel J. Kelley
Attorney William R. Sachse

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

uploaded 2005/09/28