Iowa Workers' Compensation

  Interstate Power & Light Co v. Moyer , No. 22-1917 (Iowa App. Dec. 20, 2023) Claimant suffered a crush injury to his foot and was awarded permanent partial disability benefits.  Three years later, claimant filed for review-reopening and was awarded permanent total disability.  Following the initial injury to the foot, claimant developed back problems that ultimately led to the implantation of a  lumbar neurostimulator and an operation (a gastrocnemius release) on claimant's calf.  Claimant continued to have low back and hip pain.  Claimant also developed mental health problems, diagnosed as pain disorder with psychological factors, including major depressive disorder. Defendants' doctors found the mental health problems were not work-related, but claimant's IME doctor concluded that the depression was related to claimant's physical injuries. At hearing, defendants argued that an increased award was barred by res judicata and that permanent and total d...

  Green v. North Central Iowa Regional Solid Waste Authority , No. 21-0490 (Iowa April 14, 2023) Claimant filed a workers' compensation claim against his employer for an injury that occurred at work.  As a part of the case, the employer agreed that claimant's work had caused her cerebral hemorrhage.  The employer paid temporary benefits for the injury for three months, but the employer argued that the injury had not resulted in a permanent injury.  The agency agreed that no permanent injury had occurred and an appeal to the district court affirmed this result.  Claimant subsequently filed a review-reopening claim (in a timely manner based on the earlier payment of temporary benefits), arguing that her injury had become permanent over time.  The agency, on summary judgment, concluded that claimant had previously litigated the issue of permanency and found that the claim was barred under res judicata principles. On judicial review, the district court conclude...

In Brinck v. Siouxland Mental Health Center , No. 17-1774 (Iowa App. Sept. 12, 2018), claimant filed a review reopening action alleging that his mental disorder was caused by his earlier work injury.  The commissioner dismissed the action, finding that the mental health problems were not related to the work injury and further concluding that even if they had been related, this had been litigated previously and was barred by res judicata.  The Court of Appeals affirms the decision of the agency. The court begins its opinion by noting that generally speaking, after an employee is awarded benefits for an injury sustained at work, the cause is closed, whether by judicial decision or settlement. Under the review-reopening provisions of the statute, however, the case may be reopened if the claimant demonstrates that the employee's current condition is proximately caused by the original injury. Claimant was a doctor at the mental health facility who fell and hit his head.  A...

The Court of Appeals in NID, Inc. v. Monahan, No. 14-0292 (Iowa App. March 25, 2015) grappled with questions of res judicata and judicial estoppel in the context of an alternate medical care proceeding.  The court concluded that res judicata and judicial estoppel did not apply and refused to enter sanctions against the defendants for their failure to provide care. The court begins by noting that the proceeding was "unnecessarily Dickensian in duration and procedural complexity."  Claimant had suffered an injury to his shoulder in 2007 and received treatment for that injury.  He filed a petition almost two years after the injury and at hearing the parties stipulated that claimant had suffered an injury that arose out of his employment.  The parties disputed whether claimant's medical expenses were connected to the injury.  After the arbitration hearing but before decision, claimant treated, on his own, with Dr. Neff, who recommended surgery for the left shoulde...