Opinion

Stanley D. Hendricks v. W. Va. Office of Insurance Commissioner/Patton, Inc.

Court
West Virginia Supreme Court
Filed
May 22, 2013
Status
Published
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA

SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS FILED

May 22, 2013

RORY L. PERRY II, CLERK

STANLEY D. HENDRICKS, SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS

OF WEST VIRGINIA

Claimant Below, Petitioner

vs.) No. 11-1183 (BOR Appeal No. 2045600)

(Claim No. 2005017526)

WEST VIRGINIA OFFICE OF

INSURANCE COMMISSIONER

Commissioner Below, Respondent

and

PATTON, INC.,

SPARTAN MINING COMPANY, and

WORKMAN’S CONSTRUCTION, INC.,

Employers Below, Respondent

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Petitioner Stanley D. Hendricks, by John Blair, his attorney, appeals the decision of the

West Virginia Workers’ Compensation Board of Review. The West Virginia Office of Insurance

Commissioner, by Jon Snyder, its attorney, filed a timely response.

This appeal arises from the Board of Review’s Final Order dated July 20, 2011, in which

the Board affirmed a February 15, 2011, Order of the Workers’ Compensation Office of Judges.

In its Order, the Office of Judges affirmed the claims administrator’s July 10, 2008, decision

denying Mr. Hendricks’s application for a permanent total disability award. 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. Hendricks applied for a permanent total disability award on January 24, 2007, stating

that he had been granted a total of 62% in permanent partial disability awards. The Permanent

Total Disability Review Board on June 16, 2008, found that the evaluations of Drs. Landis and

Faheem were the most accurate assessments of Mr. Hendricks’s whole body medical impairment

from his occupational injuries and/or diseases. It concluded that Mr. Hendricks suffered from

29% whole body medical impairment, and recommended denying further consideration of a

permanent total disability award. On July 10, 2008, the claims administrator denied the

application for a permanent total disability award.

The Office of Judges affirmed the claims administrator’s Order, and held that the

preponderance of the evidence did not establish that Mr. Hendricks had met the 50% whole body

medical impairment threshold required for further consideration of a permanent total disability

award. On appeal, Mr. Hendricks disagrees and asserts that it was incorrect to not rely on Dr.

Guberman’s report, and according to such report he suffers from 51% whole body medical

impairment and is entitled to further consideration of a permanent total disability award. The

West Virginia Office of Insurance Commissioner maintains that Mr. Hendricks has not shown

that the Permanent Total Disability Review Board is clearly wrong. Dr. Guberman on July 13,

2010, found that Mr. Hendricks suffered from 51% whole body medical impairment from his

compensable injuries and conditions. In his report, he noted that Mr. Hendricks had received a

15% permanent partial disability award for occupational hearing loss.

Under West Virginia Code § 23-4-6(n)(1) (2005), to qualify for a permanent total

disability award, the applicant must be found to suffer from 50% whole body medical

impairment due to occupational injuries or diseases. The Permanent Total Disability Review

Board found that Mr. Hendricks suffered from only 29% whole body medical impairment. The

Office of Judges held that the preponderance of the evidence does not establish that Mr.

Hendricks met the statutory threshold. It noted that Dr. Guberman’s report incorrectly stated that

Mr. Hendricks received a 15% permanent partial disability award for occupational hearing loss,

and that he had only received a 12% permanent partial disability award. It further noted that Dr.

Guberman was the only physician to find impairment in the thoracic spine and facial laceration.

The Office of Judges concluded that Dr. Guberman’s report when corrected did not support a

finding that Mr. Hendricks had 50% whole body medical impairment, and thus affirmed the

denial of the application for a permanent total disability award. The Board of Review reached the

same reasoned conclusions in its decision of July 20, 2011. We agree with the reasoning and

conclusions of the Board of Review.

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.

2

Affirmed.

ISSUED: May 22, 2013

CONCURRED IN BY:

Justice Robin J. Davis

Justice Margaret L. Workman

Justice Menis E. Ketchum

Justice Allen H. Loughry II

Chief Justice Brent D. Benjamin, Disqualified

3

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.