Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

William T. Lusk v. WVOIC/Spartan Mining Company

Date: 03-14-2022

Case Number: 20-0720

Judge: CONCURRED IN BY: Chief Justice John A. Hutchison Justice Elizabeth D. Walker Justice Tim Armstead Justice William R. Wooton Justice Alan D. Moats, sitting by temporary assignment

Court:

STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS

On appeal from The West Virginia Workers’ Compensation Board of Review

Plaintiff's Attorney:



Charleston, WV - Best Workers’ Compensation Lawyer Directory



Tell MoreLaw About Your Litigation Successes and MoreLaw Will Tell the World.



Re: MoreLaw National Jury Verdict and Settlement



Counselor:

MoreLaw collects and publishes civil and criminal litigation information from the state and federal courts nationwide. Publication is free and access to the information is free to the public.

MoreLaw will publish litigation reports submitted by you free of charge

Defendant's Attorney: Sean Harter

Description:

Charleston, WV - Workers' Compensation lawyer represented portioner with appealing the West Virginia Workers' Compensation Board of Review.





Mr. Lusk, a coal miner, reported that he was injured on September 7, 2018, when his feet

became stuck in mud while ambulating. As he struggled to free himself, he suffered a twist

injury to his back. Mr. Lusk was transferred to the Raleigh Regional Hospital Emergency

Department where he complained of mid/lower back pain without radiation. X-rays taken of Mr.

Lusk's lumbar spine revealed degenerative disc disease and spondylosis but did not reveal any

evidence of an acute injury. Ward R. Warren, M.D., diagnosed a lumbar strain. Due to continued

pain, Mr. Lusk visited Princeton Community Hospital on September 9, 2019, with complaints of

low back pain, which radiated into his lower left extremity. Amos M. Lane, M.D., diagnosed

radicular lumbar pain.

After receiving a diagnosis, Mr. Lusk signed two Employees' and Physicians' Reports of

Occupational Injury or Disease, one on September 7, 2018, and the other on September 13, 2018.

Mr. Lusk stated in his first injury report that he had injured his "back and leg” and in his second

injury report he stated that he injured his "low back.” Jackie D. Shorter, PA-C of Family

Healthcare Associates noted that Mr. Lusk complained of back and leg symptoms and diagnosed

lumbar strain and lumbar radiculopathy on September 13, 2018, and September 26, 2018. On

October 1, 2018, the claims administrator held the claim compensable for a strain of the muscle,

fascia, and tendon of the lower back.

An MRI taken of Mr. Lusk's lumbar spine at Princeton Community Hospital on October

12, 2018, revealed L4-L5 annular bulging and facet hypertrophy, which mildly narrowed the

spinal canal and both neural canals, and L5-S1 right paracentral herniated nucleus pulposis with

left-sided degenerative facet hypertrophy, which mildly narrowed the spinal canal and narrowed

3

the left neural canal. Kenneth Fortgang, M.D., a radiologist, interpreted the MRI and issued an

Age of Injury Analysis report on October 31, 2018, concluding that the findings were chronic

within a degree of medical probability. The MRI did not reveal specific acute findings.

A Progress Note from Family Healthcare Associates dated November 14, 2018, stated

that Mr. Lusk was still having pain in the left shoulder with decreased range of motion. The

assessment was left shoulder strain, lumbar strain, and lumbar radiculopathy. On the same date, a

Princeton Community Hospital Radiology Report regarding Mr. Smith's left shoulder showed no

fracture or subluxation.

Michael A. Muscari, M.D., who sought a consultation to Neurological Associates for Mr.

Lusk due to his abnormal MRI, issued a report dated November 14, 2018. Dr. Muscari requested

the neurological consultation on October 16, 2018, and the claims administrator denied the

request on November 6, 2018, stating that the disc herniation at L5-S1 was due to a condition

that predates the injury. Dr. Muscari disagreed with the claims administrator's decision and

reported that Mr. Lusk suffered low back pain with radiculopathy, decreased range of motion,

and increasing pain due to the disc herniation. Again, Dr. Muscari requested a consultation with

a neurosurgeon, and he requested authorization of a left-shoulder MRI. By Order dated

December 5, 2018, the claims administrator denied Dr. Muscari's request for authorization of a

left-shoulder MRI, as the purported need for the requested procedure was not due to the

compensable injury. Mr. Lusk continued to experience low back and shoulder pain, and on

March 12, 2019, Dr. Muscari requested to add left shoulder sprain and lumbar disc displacement

as compensable diagnoses. The claims administrator denied Dr. Muscari's request on April 2,

2019. Mr. Lusk protested the claims administrator's decision.

In a March 31, 2019, report, Ronald J. Fadel, M.D., indicated that he reviewed Mr.

Lusk's medical records for a determination of the appropriateness for additional diagnoses of

lumbar disc displacement and left shoulder sprain. Dr. Fadel, an orthopedic surgeon, stated that

he was unable to find any reference to Mr. Lusk's left shoulder in the initial Report of

Occupational Injury or Disease. Similarly, none of the provider records, physical therapy notes,

or medical evaluations contain any comment or complaint regarding his shoulder until two

months after the injury. Dr. Fadel questioned how such a shoulder injury with a level of pain as

described by Mr. Lusk could go unmentioned/overlooked and unaddressed in previous records.

As a result, Dr. Fadel concluded that a shoulder sprain should not be accepted as a compensable

diagnosis in the instant claim. He added that a disc bulge was not a disc displacement, there was

no objective evidence of compression of a neural element, and evaluation of the claimant

revealed normal neurological findings, so he did not recommend that lumbar disc displacement

be added as a compensable diagnosis.

In a Progress Note dated April 5, 2019, Family Healthcare Associates assessed Mr. Lusk

with left shoulder strain, lumbar strain and lumbar radiculopathy. A request was made for a

referral to specialists Rajesh V. Patel, M.D., and Andrew C. Thymius, D.O., for additional

consideration of Mr. Lusk's low back and right leg pain conditions. In a Consultation Report

dated April 17, 2019, Dr. Patel stated that Mr. Lusk was still in a moderate amount of pain and

that any activity aggravates his pain. It was stated that he is unable to walk far before he has

4

pain. The assessment was right L5-S1 lumbar disc herniation, right sacroiliac radiculopathy,

lumbar disc protrusion at L4-L5, stenosis secondary to disc protrusion at L4-L5, and right L5

radiculopathy. In order to avoid surgery, Dr. Patel believed that injections might help Mr. Lusk

with his pain, and he wanted to seek a referral to a pain clinic for epidural injections at L4-L5

and L5-S1 on the right side. If the injections failed, then surgery would be entertained.

By Order of April 24, 2019, the claims administrator approved the request from Dr. Patel

for referral to Dr. Thymius for lumbar epidural steroid injection. Dr. Thymius' assistant, Melissa

D. Lilly, PA-C, who examined Mr. Lusk on May 20, 2019, noted lower-back and leg pain. Ms.

Lilly did not reference any left-shoulder symptoms. Her recommendation was lumbar

transforaminal epidural steroid injections, which Dr. Thymius administered to the right side of

Mr. Lusk's back at L4-L5 and L5-S1 on July 11, 2019.

In a Progress Note dated May 29, 2019, Dr. Patel assessed Mr. Lusk with right L5-S1

lumbar disc herniation; right S1 radiculopathy; lumbar disc protrusion at L4-L5; stenosis

secondary to disc protrusion at L4-L5; and right L5 radiculopathy. Dr. Patel explained that from

a surgical standpoint, he was considering a decompression and possible fusion. An August 5,

2019, Progress Note indicated that Mr. Lusk had continued pain in his lower back and right leg,

which was not responding to conservative treatment. The epidurals did not relieve his pain. Dr.

Patel requested a repeat MRI of Mr. Lusk's lumbar spine to assess his possible need for surgery

for disc herniations/protrusions.1

In her Office Note of August 22, 2019, Ms. Lilly stated that Mr. Lusk had no relief from

back pain for over a month. At times he feels like there is an electrical shock going down his

legs. He also felt depressed. The plan was to start Mr. Lusk on Cymbalta, which would assist

both depression and pain. He was assessed with intervertebral disc displacement, lumbar and

lumbosacral region; spinal stenosis; spondylosis, lumbosacral region; and intervertebral disc

degeneration of the lumbar and lumbosacral regions. A request was issued for the medication

Cymbalta by Dr. Thymius. By Order dated September 9, 2019, the claims administrator denied

the request regarding authorization for the medication Cymbalta under the belief that the

medication was requested to treat a condition that is not related to the work injury of September

7, 2018.

On October 4, 2019, Dr. Fadel issued a Record Review Report documenting that Mr.

Lusk has a protracted history of low back injuries/issues, including degenerative issues with

annular bulging at L4-L5, a small to moderate sized paracentral herniated nucleus pulposus, and

left-sided degenerative facet hypertrophy at L5-S1. Dr. Fadel was asked for an opinion on

whether surgery would be necessary to treat the compensable injury of September 7, 2018, or if

the injury was due to a preexisting condition. Dr. Fadel opined that surgery has been a reasonable

consideration for Mr. Lusk's condition as far back as 2006. Because the most recent MRI failed

1 By Order dated October 10, 2019, the claims administrator denied Dr. Patel's request

for authorization of the repeat lumbar MRI, as the purported need was due to a non-compensable

condition. Mr. Lusk timely protested the claims administrator's decision.

5

to reveal any acute change at L4-L5 or L5-S1, Dr. Fadel could not support aggravation of

preexisting disease versus repeat exacerbation of the acquired age-related, degenerative

spondylopathy in the lumbar spine. Although Dr. Fadel felt that the recommended surgery is in

the best interest of Mr. Lusk, he stated that coverage for the procedure should be through his

personal healthcare resources and not workers' compensation. Finally, Dr. Fadel recommended a

referral to a pain clinic to try epidural injections at L4-L5 and L5-S1 on the right side to see if

injections may alleviate Mr. Lusk's pain.

Mr. Lusk was seen by Dr. Thymius on October 16, 2019, and reported that he was not

able to start his treatment with Cymbalta because the claims administrator did not approve the

medication. He notified Dr. Thymius that Dr. Patel recommended L4-L5 and L5-S1 surgery, but

the request was denied by the claims administrator. The assessment was other intervertebral disc

displacement, lumbar region. The recommendation was that Mr. Lusk follow-up with Dr. Patel

and that the two level fusion surgery would be appropriate.

In a Supplemental Report dated October 26, 2019, Dr. Mukkamala stated that he had

evaluated Mr. Lusk on three occasions, December 4, 2018; February 25, 2019; and September

12, 2019. During those occasions, Mr. Lusk did not state that he had injured his shoulder. He

added that Mr. Lusk had not reported having injured his left shoulder during any of his

examinations with Family Healthcare Associates before November 14, 2018. Dr. Mukkamala

diagnosed a lumbar sprain and opined that there was "no credible objective evidence that the

claimant sustained left shoulder sprain or any injury to the left shoulder as a result of the

compensable injury of September 7, 2018.” Dr. Mukkamala concluded that the left shoulder

symptoms that were reported more than two months after the compensable injury of September

7, 2018, were not causally related to the compensable injury. Dr. Mukkamala further stated that

an MRI of the left shoulder was not required because of Mr. Lusk's compensable injury of

September 7, 2018, because there was no credible objective medical evidence of a left shoulder

injury at that time. Regarding the lower back compensability issue, Dr. Mukkamala opined that

Mr. Lusk did not sustain lumbar disc displacement as the result of the compensable injury of

September 7, 2018. He added that the mechanism of injury, which was a twisting injury, was

suggestive of a lumbar sprain, and unlikely to cause a disc herniation. Dr. Mukkamala concluded

that it is clear from prior CT scans taken of Mr. Lusk's lumbar spine on June 10, 2006, that he

had lumbar spine disc herniation prior to the compensable injury of September 7, 2018.

Marsha Lee Bailey, M.D., evaluated Mr. Lusk on December 10, 2019, and diagnosed

chronic lower back pain and bilateral leg pain, which predated the instant claim by twelve years.

Dr. Bailey compared CT scans and MRIs taken of the lumbar spine before Mr. Lusk's

compensable injury of September 7, 2018, with the MRI taken of his lumbar spine on October

12, 2018, and found that the disc abnormalities at L4-L5 and L5-S1 had actually improved

between September 29, 2017, and October 12, 2018. Dr. Bailey expressed a strong opinion that

the MRI taken of Mr. Lusk's lumbar spine on October 12, 2018, revealed no acute findings

related to his compensable injury of September 7, 2018. Dr. Bailey also stated that Mr. Lusk's

ongoing lower back and lower extremity symptoms and need for surgical treatment were not the

result of the compensable injury of September 7, 2018. Dr. Bailey concluded that Mr. Lusk had

6

reached maximum medical improvement from the injury and that no further medical care or

treatment was medically needed for the compensable injury.

In a Final Decision dated February 11, 2020, the Office of Judges concluded that it is

more likely than not that Mr. Lusk did not sustain a left shoulder sprain or lumbar disc

displacement on September 7, 2018. As a result, the claims administrator's Order of April 2,

2019, was affirmed. In a separate Final Decision dated February 11, 2020, the Office of Judges

determined that it is more likely than not that the requests for Cymbalta, a lumbar MRI, a left

shoulder MRI, a neurological consultation, and lumbar injections are not medically required or

necessary treatment for the compensable injury. The Board of Review adopted the findings of

fact and conclusions of law of the Office of Judges and affirmed the two decisions dated

February 11, 2020.
Outcome:
After review, we agree with the decisions of the Office of Judges, as affirmed by the

Board of Review. A clear preponderance of the evidence establishes that Mr. Lusk did not sustain a left shoulder sprain in the course of and resulting from his employment on September 7, 2018. Mr. Lusk did not identify his left shoulder as a body part that he injured in reporting his injuries. Likewise, neither of the providers who completed the injury reports diagnosed a left shoulder injury or left shoulder sprain. The medical record indicates that Mr. Lusk has reached maximum medical improvement from his compensable lumbar sprain/strain of September 7, 2018.



Affirmed.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:

About This Case

What was the outcome of William T. Lusk v. WVOIC/Spartan Mining Company?

The outcome was: After review, we agree with the decisions of the Office of Judges, as affirmed by the Board of Review. A clear preponderance of the evidence establishes that Mr. Lusk did not sustain a left shoulder sprain in the course of and resulting from his employment on September 7, 2018. Mr. Lusk did not identify his left shoulder as a body part that he injured in reporting his injuries. Likewise, neither of the providers who completed the injury reports diagnosed a left shoulder injury or left shoulder sprain. The medical record indicates that Mr. Lusk has reached maximum medical improvement from his compensable lumbar sprain/strain of September 7, 2018. Affirmed.

Which court heard William T. Lusk v. WVOIC/Spartan Mining Company?

This case was heard in <center><h4><b> STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS </b> <br> <br> <font color="green"><i>On appeal from The West Virginia Workers’ Compensation Board of Review </i></font></center></h4>, WV. The presiding judge was CONCURRED IN BY: Chief Justice John A. Hutchison Justice Elizabeth D. Walker Justice Tim Armstead Justice William R. Wooton Justice Alan D. Moats, sitting by temporary assignment.

Who were the attorneys in William T. Lusk v. WVOIC/Spartan Mining Company?

Plaintiff's attorney: Charleston, WV - Best Workers’ Compensation Lawyer Directory Tell MoreLaw About Your Litigation Successes and MoreLaw Will Tell the World. Re: MoreLaw National Jury Verdict and Settlement Counselor: MoreLaw collects and publishes civil and criminal litigation information from the state and federal courts nationwide. Publication is free and access to the information is free to the public. MoreLaw will publish litigation reports submitted by you free of charge. Defendant's attorney: Sean Harter.

When was William T. Lusk v. WVOIC/Spartan Mining Company decided?

This case was decided on March 14, 2022.