Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Leonard D. Young v. Huntington Alloys Corp.
Citation: Not availableDocket: 16-0757
Court: West Virginia Supreme Court; July 6, 2017; West Virginia; State Supreme Court
Original Court Document: View Document
Petitioner Leonard D. Young appeals a decision from the West Virginia Workers’ Compensation Board of Review regarding a 1% permanent partial disability award. Initially, on September 24, 2014, he was granted a 4% award following a knee injury sustained on March 7, 2013, when he slipped at work. The Office of Judges later reversed this decision, attributing only 1% permanent impairment to Mr. Young, which was upheld by the Board of Review in its July 15, 2016, order. The injury, which was compensable, led to a meniscal tear diagnosed via MRI and subsequent arthroscopic repair. An independent evaluation by Dr. Prasadarao Mukkamala initially assessed 4% whole person impairment due to the injury, although he noted that Mr. Young's need for further knee surgery was related to pre-existing conditions. Following a knee arthroplasty on October 21, 2014, Dr. Bruce Guberman evaluated Mr. Young and attributed 15% impairment to the work injury, with the remainder linked to prior knee injuries. Finally, Dr. Marsha Lee Bailey evaluated Mr. Young on September 15, 2015, determining that only 1% impairment was due to the meniscectomy, attributing other issues to pre-existing osteoarthritis and degenerative joint disease. The Court reviewed the case and found no substantial legal questions or prejudicial errors warranting further oral argument. Dr. Bailey asserts that all medical treatment provided to Mr. Young after June 13, 2014, including right knee arthroplasty, is linked to pre-existing osteoarthrosis and degenerative joint disease, supported by Mr. Young's chronic knee pain history. The Office of Judges reversed the claims administrator's September 24, 2014, decision, determining that Mr. Young has a 1% whole person impairment due to a compensable right knee injury. This conclusion was affirmed by the Board of Review on July 15, 2016. Mr. Young appeals to reinstate a previously granted 4% permanent partial disability award. The Office of Judges found Dr. Guberman's impairment rating for the arthroplasty unreliable as it was unauthorized. They also noted that Dr. Mukkamala did not account for Mr. Young's substantial pre-existing conditions due to incomplete medical history during evaluation. The Office of Judges deemed Dr. Bailey's 1% impairment recommendation from the partial medial meniscectomy report as the most credible. The Board of Review's decision was upheld, confirming that it did not violate any legal provisions or misinterpret the evidence. The decision was affirmed by the judges, with one dissenting opinion.