Court of Appeals Affirms Award of Healing Period Benefits In Review-Reopening Case

The court in Hill Concrete v. Dixson, No. 13-1778 (Iowa App. Oct. 15, 2014), addressed issues of healing period benefits in a review-reopening proceeding.  Defendants argued that healing period benefits can only be awarded on review reopening when the claimant's condition warrants additional benefits under section 86.14(2) rather than when claimant had reached MMI under section 85.34(1).  The court initially concludes that the timeframe for healing period benefits under 85.34(1) applies in review reopening proceedings, Since the decision of the agency finding that MMI had not occurred until May 4, 2012, the award of healing period benefits from July 16, 2010 to May 4 was appropriate.

The case had originally been settled by the parties for 55% industrial disability, and claimant subsequently developed pain in his hip resulting in a hip arthroplasty.  Dr. Mahoney took him off work following the arthroplasty, and ultimately found MMI on May 4, 2012.  The agency awarded healing period benefits, despite defendants' argument that claimant was pain free as of July 16, 2010. Defendants argued that section 86.14(2) "does not allow for continued healing period benefits once there has been a removal of the change of condition that warranted a re-initiation of healing period benefits in the first place."

The court concludes that in a review-reopening proceeding, "we find no support in either the Iowa Code or our case law indicating section 85.34(1) does not govern the timeframe in which healing period benefits can be awarded."  The court notes that defendants conceded that an increase in compensation was demonstrated when he proved the need for hip replacement surgery.  The court concludes that there is nothing in the review reopening statute that changes the standard for awarding healing period benefits, and finds that it would be "illogical" to have a different set of standards for healing period in the review-reopening context.

With respect to healing period, the court concludes that substantial evidence supported the conclusion that benefits did not end until May 4, 2012, when Dr. Mahoney found MMI.  The agency decision awarding healing period benefits was affirmed.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Court of Appeals Affirms Denial of Workers' Compensation Benefits; Rules on Credit Issue

2021 Workers' Compensation Appeal Decisions

2024 Workers' Compensation Appeal Decisions