AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The case involves a worker, Mark J. Plomer, who sustained a work-related injury on March 18, 2019, involving his right wrist and hand, which was diagnosed as mild to moderate carpal tunnel syndrome. This condition was an aggravation of a previous work-related injury from 2009, which had been resolved but left the worker with occasional numbness and tingling. On the day of the incident, the worker experienced severe symptoms that impaired his ability to perform his job duties. He notified his supervisor of the accident on the same day and completed a written "Notice of Accident" report the following day.

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Employer/Insurer-Appellants: Argued that the compensation order should not be final for appeal, claimed the worker failed to provide timely notice of the accident, and contested that Dr. Drew Newhoff was not an authorized healthcare provider (HCP) whose testimony on causation should be admitted.
• Worker-Appellee: Conceded that the order is final for appeal and maintained that he provided timely notice of the accident and that Dr. Newhoff was an authorized HCP whose testimony on causation was rightfully admitted.

Legal Issues

• Whether the amended compensation order is final and appealable.
• Whether the worker provided the employer with legally adequate notice of the accident.
• Whether Dr. Drew Newhoff was an authorized healthcare provider and if his testimony on causation should be admitted.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the Workers’ Compensation Judge’s amended compensation order awarding benefits to the worker.

Reasons

• The Court of Appeals, per Ives, J., with Attrep, C.J., and Baca, J., concurring, held that:
  The amended compensation order is final for appeal as it determined all issues of law and fact to the fullest extent possible, including timely notice and causation, despite the claim for indemnity benefits being deemed premature (paras 2-4).
  The worker provided legally adequate notice of the accident to the employer. The Court applied a three-part test to determine that the worker sustained an accidental injury on March 18, 2019, which was an aggravation of a preexisting condition from a 2009 work-related accident. The worker's immediate notification of the accident and completion of a "Notice of Accident" report within fifteen days were deemed compliant with statutory requirements (paras 5-11).
  Dr. Drew Newhoff was considered an authorized healthcare provider as the employer permitted the worker to make the initial HCP selection and failed to follow the statutory procedure to change the HCP after denying coverage. The Court affirmed the WCJ’s decision to admit Dr. Newhoff’s testimony on causation, emphasizing the employer's misunderstanding of the law regarding HCP selection and the admissibility of such testimony (paras 12-16).