*/
Workers’
Compensation Board
OPINION ENTERED: November 18, 2016
CLAIM NO. 201457295
HELEN COCHRANE PETITIONER
VS. APPEAL FROM HON. R. ROLAND CASE,
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE
LAUREL CO. FISCAL COURT
HON. R. ROLAND CASE,
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE RESPONDENTS
OPINION
AFFIRMING
*
* * * * *
BEFORE: ALVEY, Chairman, STIVERS and RECHTER, Members.
RECHTER,
Member. Helen Cochrane (“Cochrane”) appeals
from the May 2, 2016 Opinion and Order and the June 1, 2016 Order rendered by
Hon. R. Roland Case, Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”). The ALJ dismissed Cochrane’s claim after
determining she did not suffer work-related back and bilateral legs
injuries. Cochrane now appeals, arguing
the evidence compels a contrary result.
We affirm.
Cochrane worked for
Laurel County Fiscal Court (“Laurel County”) as a corrections officer. She alleged she injured her low back on
October 23, 2014, while pushing a large food cart weighing approximately 750
pounds, which had a crippled wheel. She
felt her back pop and experienced immediate pain. Her husband drove her to Saint Joseph London
Hospital, where she was treated for complaints of low back pain, numbness and
tingling in both legs. She was diagnosed
with lumbar radiculopathy and L5 pars interarticularis
fracture, and was referred for injections and medial branch blocks. Cochrane did not return to work at Laurel
County after the injury, although her testimony was somewhat unclear as to
whether she was fired from her job or resigned.
Cochrane amended her
Form 101 to also include an injury date of August 30, 2014. She testified that she slipped at work while
walking up a staircase. She fell against
the railing and twisted her back as she caught herself.
Substantial evidence
was presented concerning Cochrane’s back condition prior to the injury. An MRI report dated July 9, 2008 revealed
mild lumbar spine degenerative disc disease and L4-5 small right posterolateral
disc protrusion with mild right foraminal
narrowing. She began treating with
Neurosurgical Associates on September 3, 2009 with chief complaints of back
pain. She attributed these complaints to
a 2004 motor vehicle accident. She
described lumbar pain that did not radiate into the legs. A 2009 MRI revealed mild disc desiccation at
L3-4, L4-5 and L5-S1.
Cochrane first visited Laurel Medical Associates on June 9,
2009 with complaints of back pain.
Injections were performed. An MRI
dated June 12, 2009 revealed mild diffuse disc bulges at multiple lumbar
levels, minimal disc protrusion at L3-4 with mild left L3-4 neural foraminal compromise.
She was treated on June 11, 2009, September 19, 2011, and April 16,
2014, and complained of chronic low back pain at each visit. She also visited Laurel Medical Associates on
October 24, 2014, the day after the alleged injury, and complained of low back
pain. She reported a fall at work 2 to 3
months prior which worsened while pushing a food cart the day before. She was prescribed an injection and an MRI
was ordered.
Cochrane first
presented to Lake Cumberland Neurosurgical Clinic on October 23, 2009 with
complaints of low back pain. She was
diagnosed with degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine with lumbar
radiculopathy. Her prior MRI was
reviewed, and no evidence of significant nerve root compression was found. She was prescribed muscle relaxers and
physical therapy. Another MRI was
performed on March 5, 2010 which revealed mild diffuse disc bulges throughout
the lumbar spine with evidence of mild bilateral neural foraminal
narrowing at L3-4 and L4-5.
Cochrane visited
Advanced Pain Medicine on March 20, 2014 and April 7, 2014. She complained of low back pain. On exam, muscle spasm in the paraspinous region and L5-S1 joint tenderness were
noted. Cochrane was diagnosed with
bilateral chronic pain due to trauma, bilateral joint segmental instability,
bilateral tendonitis, bilateral bursitis, bilateral sponylosis,
bilateral degenerative disc disease and annular tears of the lumbar spine. She received bilateral sacroiliac joint
injections.
Cochrane began treating
with Dr. William J. Lester in 2008 for low back pain. Dr. Lester’s records note the 2008 MRI which
revealed degenerative disc disease and bulging discs at L4-5 and L5-S1. Dr. Lester again treated Cochrane for low
back pain in November and December 2009, and several times in 2010 and
2011. He diagnosed chronic low back pain
and prescribed Lortab and Flexeril. Cochrane visited Dr. Lester on September 3,
2013 for low back pain. On October 28,
2014, five days after the alleged accident, Cochrane complained of low back
pain with occasional numbness and tingling in both legs.
After the alleged
accident, Cochrane treated with Dr. Magdy El-Kalliny for back pain.
He assessed degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine and lumbar
radiculopathy. He reviewed Cochrane’s
MRI which revealed an annular tear at L4-5, L5-S1 and mild bulging of the
discs. He diagnosed bilateral pars defect,
to which he attributes the back pain but not the leg pain. He recommended a spinal cord stimulator
trial.
Independent medical
evaluations were conducted by Dr. Arthur Hughes, Dr. David Jenkinson and Dr.
Russell Travis. Dr. Hughes diagnosed
lower back pain with left lumbar radiculopathy, which he attributed to the work
incident. He noted Cochrane had a
history of back pain stemming from the 2003 motor vehicle accident, which
worsened after the work incident. Dr.
Hughes did not believe Cochrane had an active impairment prior to the work
incident, and she does not retain the capacity to return to her prior job.
Drs. Jenkinson and
Travis disagreed with Dr. Hughes’ opinion. Upon review of the medical records,
Dr. Jenkinson noted Cochrane’s long history of low back pain. He did not see any significant change among
MRI reports performed in 2009 and after the work incident. He assigned no impairment and opined Cochrane
has no limitations or restrictions.
Similarly, Dr. Travis found no significant difference between a 2010 MRI
and an October 27, 2014 MRI. He assigned
no impairment rating, and stated any back and leg pain is pre-existing.
The ALJ ultimately determined Cochrane did not sustain a
work-related injury. In reaching this
conclusion, he noted the extensive documentation of treatment for back pain
since 2008. He particularly noted
Cochrane had treated for low back pain with Laurel Medical Associates on August
27, 2014, just three days before the alleged fall in the stairway at work. Relying on Drs. Travis and Jenkinson, the ALJ
concluded Cochrane has “long standing back problems for which she had received
treatment and did not sustain an injury as defined by the Act.” Cochrane’s petition for reconsideration was
summarily denied.
On appeal, Cochrane
argues the evidence compels a finding she suffered a work-related injury. Acknowledging she suffered chronic back pain
since 2008, Cochrane posits that the evidence compels a finding her back
condition was aggravated and exacerbated by the work incident. It is important to note that Cochrane does
not argue the ALJ entered insufficient findings of fact to support his
decision. Therefore, on appeal, our
determination is solely whether the evidence compels a result in Cochrane’s
favor. Wolf Creek Collieries v. Crum, 673 S.W.2d 735
(Ky. App. 1984). “Compelling evidence” is defined as
evidence that is so overwhelming, no
reasonable person could reach the same conclusion as the ALJ. REO Mechanical v. Barnes, 691 S.W.2d 224 (Ky. App. 1985).
The evidence does not
compel a finding that Cochrane suffered a work-related injury. Significant medical records documented
Cochrane’s treatment for chronic back pain since 2008. She was treated for low back pain just days
before the incident at work when she fell in the stairway. Drs. Travis and Jenkinson found no evidence
of permanent impairment and concluded Cochrane suffered no change in the human
organism as a result of the alleged work incidents. This proof constitutes the requisite evidence
to support the decision that Cochrane suffered no injury as defined by the Act.
Cochrane has pointed to
evidence which would support a finding in her favor, including Dr. Hughes’
report and her own testimony about the increased pain she experiences since
October 2014. However, conflicting proof
is insufficient to reverse the decision of the ALJ. McCloud v. Beth-Elkhorn
Corp., 514 S.W.2d 46 (Ky. 1974). This Board is without authority to reweigh
the evidence and direct a finding contrary to that reached by the ALJ.
For the foregoing
reasons, the May 2, 2016 Opinion and Order and the June 1, 2016 Order rendered
by Hon. R. Roland Case, Administrative Law Judge, are hereby AFFIRMED.
ALL CONCUR.
COUNSEL
FOR PETITIONER:
HON MCKINNLEY MORGAN
921 S MAIN ST
LONDON, KY 40741
COUNSEL
FOR RESPONDENT:
HON BARRY LEWIS
PO BOX 800
HAZARD, KY 41702
ADMINISTRATIVE
LAW JUDGE:
HON R. ROLAND CASE
PREVENTION PARK
657 CHAMBERLIN AVENUE
FRANKFORT, KY 40601
