Court of Appeals Concludes that Bifurcation Process Under 85.34(2)(v) Only Applies When a Worker Returns to Work for the Employer and is Later Terminated By the Same Employer
Den Hartog Industries v. Dungan , No. 23-1402 (Iowa App. Jan. 9, 2025) Claimant suffered an injury at work and continued to work for the employer for 11 months with some work restrictions. He left the job after 11 months to take a different job and move closer to his family. He subsequently found work, making more than he was making at the time of his job with Den Hartog. The commissioner concluded that claimant's back injury should be compensated industrially under the provisions of 85.34(2)(v). The commissioner concluded that the functional impairment provision of the statute did not apply to claimant because he voluntarily separated from the employer and had not been terminated by the employer. The district court affirmed, finding that 85.34(2)(v)'s bifurcated process would be imposed only when the employer returned to work and was then terminated by the employer. On review, the Court concludes that 85.34(2)(v) recognizes two categories for benefit calc...