Iowa Workers' Compensation

The Iowa Court of Appeals rejected defendants' argument that the opinion of claimant's expert had to be evaluated under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals. Frank v. FITS Mfg., No. 09-1419 ( Iowa App. May 26, 2010) http://www.iowacourts.gov/court_of_appeals/Recent_Opinions/20100526/0-186.pdf. Frank involved a claimant who developed respiratory problems, ostensibly at work. Claimant's expert witness, a pulmonologist from the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, believed that the constrictive bronchiolitis that claimant developed was related to her work. Defendants' experts, an industrial hygienist and an occupational physician, did not believe that the fumes at the workplace caused or contributed to claimant's condition. The defendants' specifically asked the Court of Appeals to adopt the Daubert standard as the law in Iowa. The court rejected this invitation, finding that the Iowa Supreme Court had previously declined to apply Daubert in L

In what the deputy described as what may have been the longest alternate medical care hearing ever before the agency, the employer was found to have "actively interfered" with the care recommendations made by the treating doctor.   Dodge v. Excel Corp./Cargill Meat Solutions , No. 5032411 (AMC April 27, 2010).  The physician had restricted claimant to sitting duty only, with her leg elevated.  As a part of her light duty work, claimant was made to sit in an 8 x 10 foot room with as many as 11 other workers, and she testified that the nurses at Cargill never check her status.  Despite attempts by claimant to have the doctor change her work status and place her off work, the doctor indicated his hands were tied by the employer's indication that it had suitable work for the claimant. Although claimant's arguments were primarily about the treatment she had received at the hands of the employer, she also argued that the employer had interfered with the medical judgments