Posts

Showing posts with the label Statute of limitations

Court of Appeals Affirms Dismissal of Tinnitus Claim on Statute of Limitations Grounds

  Havill v. Quaker Oats Company , No. 21-1740 (Iowa App. June 15, 2022) In this tinnitus case, the workers' compensation commissioner dismissed the claim, finding that the claim was barred by the statute of limitations.  The commissioner concluded that claimant knew or should have known of the nature, seriousness and possible compensable nature of the condition by fall of 2016 and yet did not file a claim until June of 2019.  In reaching this conclusion, the commissioner found that given the incidents and diagnoses made of tinnitus by the fall of 2016 and the fact that claimant sought care at that time, combined with a condition severe enough that claimant had an emotional reaction and needed to lie down, was sufficient to demonstrate claimant knew of the nature, seriousness and possible compensable character of the injury at that time.  The district court affirmed the decision of the commissioner.   The Court of Appeals finds that substantial evidence supp...

Supreme Court Holding Denies Cumulative Injury Alleged in Review Reopening Action Following Initial Acute Injury

As presented by the Supreme Court in Gumm v. Easter Seal Society of Iowa, Inc. , No. 18-1051 (Iowa May 1,  2020), the issue before the court was "whether a workers' compensation claimant who receives disability benefits for a traumatic injury can later recover disability benefits on a separate disability claim if the cumulative injury is based solely on aggravation of the earlier traumatic injury."  The court unanimously concluded that Ms. Gumm could not recover. Claimant initially suffered a fracture of her right ankle, for which she was paid WC benefits following surgery.  The last payment of benefits for the injury was on May 10, 2010.  Claimant continued to suffer from right ankle pain and in January of 2012 returned to the treating physician.  The physician believed that this could have been from a coincidence or from compensating for her right ankle pain. On April 11, 2012, she underwent another surgery, returning to full-duty work on May 3.  Cla...

Court of Appeals Affirms Decision Finding that the Filing of Claimant's Petition was Untimely

In Myers v. R.R. Donnelly & Sons , No. 17-0306 (Iowa App. Sept. 13, 2017), the Court of Appeals upheld a decision of the agency concluding that claimant's petition was untimely and was not saved by the discovery rule.   Claimant was employed by Donnelly as a press operator until 2011, when he was moved to another position because he could not longer perform the duties of a press operator as a result of back problems.  The back problems had begun in 1999.  The agency concluded that claimant knew his back problems were related to his work by 2009.  On November 2012, claimant received permanent restrictions of no lifting of more than 40 pounds and was terminated because the employer could not accommodate his work restrictions.  Claimant filed a petition on April 2, 2013. The agency concluded that claimant's injury date was 2/25/09, when claimant's doctor diagnosed him with disabling mechanical back pain and referred him to his surgeon.  The deputy f...

Court of Appeals Affirms Dismissal of Claim on Notice, Statute of Limitations Grounds

The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the commissioner dismissing claimant's case on grounds of lack of notice and statute of limitations.   Ross v. American Ordnance , No. 16-0787 (Iowa App. Jan. 11, 2017). Claimant hurt her shoulder on November 1, 2012 and told her supervisor about this injury.  She was asked whether she needed to see a doctor but claimant indicated she was not hurt that bad.  She did not fill out an injury report.  She continued to have problems with her shoulder and saw a doctor for a cortisone injection on January 11, 2013.  An incident report was made on March 14, 2013 and claimant was diagnosed with a rotator cuff tear and later had surgery. At hearing, claimant testified that she told her supervisor she had hurt her shoulder.  The supervisor testified that claimant told him her shoulder "hurts a little bit."  He was not sure claimant was relating her injury to work and did not ask whether she was injured while worki...

Court of Appeals Affirms 30% Industrial Disability Award, Finds that Statute of Limitations Did Not Bar Claims

In Heritage Care & Rehabilitation v. True , No. 14-0579 (Iowa App. March 11, 2015), the court affirms a decision of the commissioner holding that claimant's claim was timely filed and awarding 30% in industrial disability benefits. Claimant injured her right shoulder while taking out the trash in 2010.  She was provided medical treatment for a short period of time, but did not miss any days of work, so no weekly workers' compensation benefits were paid.  Claimant initially filed a petition seeking only medical benefits, which was filed within the limitations period.  Approximately a month before the hearing, and three days before the expiration of the statute of limitations,  claimant sought to amend her petition to include a claim for temporary and permanent benefits. She paid a $100 filing fee at the same time the amendment was filed.  The deputy hearing the case initially denied the motion to amend and ordered claimant to file a separate arbitration pet...

Supreme Court Decides Review-Reopening Case Involving Statute of Limitations Issues

In Coffey v. Mid Seven Transportation Co. , No. 11-1106 (Iowa May 10, 2013), claimant filed a review-reopening petition, which was found to be untimely by the commissioner and district court.  The employee also requested reimbursement of certain post-arbitration medical expenses, which were also denied. Claimant originally had an injury to his left leg in 1994, and was unable to return to work following the injury.  After working part time, claimant was ultimately found eligible for social security disability benefits. Prior to filing his workers' compensation claim, the employee had entered into a settlement with a third party for $275,000, of which he received $134,784.95 after payment of attorney's fees and medical costs.  Claimant alleged in his workers' compensation claim that he had injured not only his leg, but his back.  He also claimed that his post polio syndrome was aggravated by his injury.  He was paid workers' compensation payments totaling $70...