Court of Appeals Remands Alternate Medical Care Proceeding to Agency, Citing Lack of Transcript on Which to Make an Informed Decision

In Lovan v. Broadlawns Medical Center, No. 19-0511 (Iowa App. April 1, 2020), the agency denied claimant's application for alternate medical care following a telephonic hearing. On judicial review, the district court found that the decision of the treating physician was so contrary to all previous medical testimony that it rises to the level of the employer choosing improper care for the employee.

On appeal, the court notes that although exhibits were present in the record, there was no transcript or recording of the AMC hearing provided to either the district court or court of appeals.  The court concludes that since claimant's own words as to the reason for dissatisfaction with the care provided was essential, the court could not adequately review the record.  The court rejected a claim that it was standard practice not to provide the transcript, finding that other AMC cases before the courts had apparently produced a transcript or record of the hearing.  With no transcript, the court could not make an informed consideration of the issue presented.  Both parties urged consideration of the matter despite the lack of transcript, but the court was unwilling to do this without an adequate record.  

The court found that when presented with an inadequate agency record on judicial review, the proper action was to dismiss the petition. The district court action was reversed and claimant's petition for judicial review was dismissed, resulting in reinstatement of the agency action.  Note that the court indicates that the party seeking judicial review bore the ultimate responsibility to ensure the agency record was before the court and in this case, the claimant initially sought judicial review.