Iowa Workers' Compensation

In  Leeper v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International, No. 18-1637 (Iowa App. Nov. 27, 2018), the court of appeals affirmed the decisions of the agency and district court finding that claimant had not demonstrated a permanent impairment.  No physician had concluded claimant had a permanent ratable impairment for loss of function under the Guides, although Dr. Kuhnlein provided a 1% impairment for pain.  Despite this, the agency found that claimant had not demonstrated a permanent impairment.   The Court of Appeals concludes that despite claimant's assertions of numerous errors under the IAPA, the case boiled down to a question of whether the decision was supported by substantial evidence.  The Court of Appeals concluded that the agency had considered the medical evidence in addition to the testimony of claimant and found that no permanent impairment had been established.  This finding, according to the court, was supported by substantial evidence and the decision was affirmed under Iowa

The following are brief synopses of some of the cases that have been decided in cases involving post 7-1-17 dates of injury and the applicability date of the 2017 law. Rubalcava v. Siouxpreme Egg Products , No. 5066865 (Arb. June 23, 2020) - In this action, Deputy Grell concludes, based on the opinions of Dr. Archer, concludes that claimant’s injury, which was characterized as a shoulder injury, extended into the body.  Claimant had rotator cuff tears which were found to be proximal to the shoulder joint, as well as a distal clavicle excision.  The decision indicates that the analysis was similar to that of finding a wrist injury to be an injury to the arm rather than the hand.  The decision also analyzes earlier decisions concerning “shoulder” injuries.  Ultimately, because claimant returned to work, the claim was limited to the rating of impairment (9%) to the body as a whole under 85.34(2)(x). Alm v. Archer Daniels Midland , No. 5067128 (Arb. June 10, 2020) - Claimant sustained

In Romero v. Curly's Foods , No. 18-2066 (Iowa App. Nov. 6, 2019), the Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of a claim on notice grounds.  Claimant had alleged a cumulative injury and urged that she did not appreciate the permanent impact on employment until just before she notified defendants of the injury.  The commissioner concluded that claimant realized that the injury was work related and serious in May of 2013 because she argued she reported the injury to defendants at that time.  Defendants argued that notification had not occurred until 2014.  On the facts of the case, the commissioner concluded that claimant had not notified defendants in a timely manner.  The commissioner also noted that this was a fact specific finding, applicable only to this case.   Rather than delve into the question of when claimant appreciated that the injury would have a permanent impact on employment, the court finds that the commissioner's findings were supported by substantial evide