Court of Appeals Affirms Commissioner's Award of Benefits Despite Negative Credibility Finding by Deputy

In Kraft Foods, Inc. v. Shariff, No. 15-0287 (Iowa App. Feb. 24, 2016), the Court of Appeals addressed a situation where the deputy found that claimant's testimony was not credible and relied on the on-site physician to find that the claim did not arise out of and in the course of employment.  The commissioner reversed the decision of the deputy on appeal.

Claimant was in an auto accident which resulted in a closed head injury, a back injury, a right shoulder injury and a left knee injury.  He was initially treated but at some point the plant doctor  "began to grow inpatient and disenchanted" with claimant, who was the safety manager for the employer.  Dr. Garrels indicated that he had "lost all respect" for the claimant and discussed the "extreme nature of his manipulation."  He left the impression with another treating doctor that he believed claimant was malingering.

Dr. Field and Dr. Epp found that claimant's right shoulder problems were related to the work accident and Dr. Epp concluded that a range of other injuries, including post-traumatic headaches were related.  Dr .Boulden indicated that the accident did not cause the pathological findings (a SLAP tear) in claimant's shoulder, but acknowledged that claimant did not have shoulder problems before the injury.

The deputy concluded that claimant failed to prove the shoulder injury was work related.  She also rejected a claim for alternate care.  On appeal, the commissioner reversed and specifically ordered Dr. Garrels not to participate in further care for claimant.  The decision of the commissioner was upheld on judicial review.

On appeal, the court noted that it reviewed final agency action, not the hearing officer's proposed decision.  The court concluded that the deputy's determinations of veracity based on personal observation of witness demeanor was a factor to be considered on review, but noted that this did not require the court to give weight to the deputy's conclusions when they were not based on his or her personal observations of demeanor evidence.  The deputy had found that claimant's personal feelings about the handling of his claims drew his credibility into question.  She found that he was not credible.  In reversing, the commissioner noted that the deputy's opinion was not based on demeanor, but on her assessment that his testimony was not consistent with other testimony in the case.  The commissioner reversed the findings of the deputy on this point and the court stated that we "are not troubled by the commissioner's divergent fact findings on this point."  The court also affirmed the commissioner's conclusion that a treating physician is not necessarily given more weight simply because of his status as a treating physician.  The commissioner also concluded that Dr. Garrels' views lacked objectivity.

The court noted that the commissioner determines the weight to give expert opinions and that they were not in a position to determine whether Dr. Garrels' contrary view trumps the other medical causation evidence cited by the commissioner. The court affirmed the commissioner's award of temporary benefits and alternative medical care.


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