Iowa Workers' Compensation

  2024 Workers' Compensation Appeal Decisions December 2024 Mulder v. Schuiteman , No. 1641929.01 (App. Dec. 13, 2024) - The deputy concluded claimant had sustained an 80% industrial disability and made findings crediting the testimony of claimant and his sister (Christenson). Defendants appeal the decision, arguing that the deputy erred in not specifically addressing certain alleged discrepancies in the record and alleging claimant was not credible. In affirming the decision, the commissioner initially notes that the deputy had the opportunity to view claimant's testimony and that of his sister, something which the commissioner did not have.  Considerable deference was given to the credibility determinations of the deputy for that reason. Defendants also pointed to various pieces of evidence that were not mentioned by the deputy in the decision.  The commissioner finds that the deputy does not need to discuss every relevant piece of evidence and find that this bit of evi...

  Hagen v. Serta/National Beddikng, LLC , No. 22-0684 (Iowa Feb. 5, 2024) Claimant failed to timely certify her expert witnesses and also failed to produce the reports of the experts at least thirty days before hearing.  The deputy found that the acceptance of the reports would be unduly prejudicial to the employer and excluded the reports.  The commissioner affirmed this decision, but the district court reversed that decision.  The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the district court on appeal and the Supreme Court accepted the case for further review. Under rule 876 IAC 4.19(3), claimant was required to certify experts within 120 days of hearing.  The rule also provides that reports from experts were to be provided within 30 days of hearing.  The rules note that evidence may be excluded "if the objecting party shows that receipt of the evidence would be unfairly prejudicial."  Hearing in the case was set for September 25, 2020. Although claim...

Tweeten dba Tweeten Farms v. Tweeten , 999 N.W.2d 270 (Iowa Dec. 22, 2023) In this action reviewing the district court decision, three issues were presented: Does the statutory bar under section 85.39(9) of the Code preclude further benefits following a compromise settlement between claimant and the Second Injury Fund? Does the discovery rule toll the statute of limitations following amendments to section 85.26(1) of the Iowa Code? How do amendments to section 85.39(2) of the Code affect reimbursement for independent medical exams?           The Supreme Court concluded that a compromise settlement with the Fund does not bar an action against the employer.  The Court further finds that, in actions based on a traumatic event, the legislative changes to 85.26(1) made in 2017 effectively eliminates the discovery rule.  Because of the decision on this third issue, the final issue concerning independent medical evaluations was not re...