Allstate Ins. Co. v. Industrial Commission, 1
| Decision Date | 28 August 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. 1,CA-IC,1 |
| Citation | 126 Ariz. 425,616 P.2d 100 |
| Parties | ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY and Miramonte Properties, Petitioners, v. The INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION of Arizona, Respondent, Carl Moser, Respondent Employee. 2294. |
| Court | Arizona Court of Appeals |
Jones, Teilborg, Sanders, Haga & Parks, P. C. by J. Russell Skelton, Phoenix, for petitioners.
Calvin Harris, Chief Counsel, The Industrial Commission of Arizona, Phoenix, for respondent.
Rabinovitz & Dix, P. C. by Bernard I. Rabinovitz, Tucson, for respondent employee.
This Special Action-Industrial Commission challenges the hearing officer's determination that medical problems encountered by respondent employee when he entered the hospital to undergo a diagnostic myelogram and subsequent surgery are the industrial responsibility of petitioner carrier and employer. We find that the hearing officer's conclusion is reasonably supported by the evidence and affirm the award.
After a back injury on August 4, 1974, respondent employee Carl Moser's workmen's compensation claim was accepted for benefits.
On July 19, 1978, on recommendation of the treating physician and with the approval of the carrier, respondent-employee was hospitalized at the Tucson Medical Center for a myelogram and possible laminectomy. Certain tests were ordered pursuant to the hospital admission, including a urinalysis and an electrocardiogram (EKG).
The EKG performed on July 19, 1978, the day of admission, revealed atrial fibrillation and other positive findings. Moser's urinalysis was also abnormal in that the protein level was increased and there were both red and white blood cells present.
As a result of the abnormal EKG and urinalysis, Robert P. Goldfarb, M.D., a neurosurgeon and the admitting physician, scheduled a consultation for Moser with William B. Carrell, M.D., an internist, for the purpose of defining and controlling the medical problems prior to undergoing the myelogram or surgery.
The problem of atrial fibrillation was first treated with digitalis preparation of quinidine which resulted in atrial fibrillation flutter. Thereafter, Moser's heart was returned to a normal sinus rhythm by Lee Schocket, M.D., a cardiologist, who prescribed and performed electrocardioversion on July 29.
Because of the initial urinalysis abnormal findings, a repeat urinalysis was performed which again demonstrated abnormal findings. As a result, an intravenous pyelogram (IVP) was performed and approximately six days following this test, Moser experienced a renal shutdown. Richard M. Thompson, M.D., the attending urologist, testified that the subsequent renal shutdown was most probably caused by the IVP.
Moser was also treated for other medical problems but on review, the carrier argues that the significant medical expense at issue is related to the extensive treatment and time delay caused by the abnormal heartbeat and urological problems. The myelogram and lumbar surgery were eventually performed. Allstate does not now contend that it is not responsible for any and all lumbar surgery and post-surgical care.
On review, the carrier argues that the pre-myelogram procedures undertaken first, to return the employee's heart to a normal sinus rhythm, and second, to treat respondent's renal shutdown, should not be considered an industrial responsibility. The carrier argues that these conditions were significant independent conditions which would have required treatment regardless of the claimant's hospitalization for diagnostic procedures and possible surgery. The hospitalization, the carrier also contends, merely provided the setting for the discovery of these underlying conditions.
The carrier's contention is based upon Ramonett v. Industrial Commission...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Wyoming Workers' Compensation Div. v. Girardot
...Brown v. State ex rel. Morgan, 79 Wyo. 355, 334 P.2d 502 (1959). The lead case cited by Girardot was Allstate Ins. Co. v. Industrial Commission, 126 Ariz. 425, 616 P.2d 100 (1980), where other medical problems were encountered by the employee when he entered the hospital to undergo a diagno......
-
Lavello v. Wilson, I-
...aggravation of an industrial injury is fully eligible for worker's compensation benefits. See AllState Insurance Co. v. Industrial Commission, 126 Ariz. 425, 616 P.2d 100 (App.1980); Liberty Mutual, supra. Further, unlike a claim for aggravation of an industrial injury by means of a separat......
-
Terrell v. The Indus. Comm'n of Ariz.
...of, and with the intent to improve, the condition resulting from the industrial injury"); Allstate Insurance Co. v. Industrial Commission, 126 Ariz. 425, 427, 616 P.2d 100, 102 (App. 1980) (complications from pre-surgery treatments deemed an industrial responsibility when necessary to place......
-
1969 Chevrolet, 2-door, I.D. No. 136379K430353, License No. PSH 616, Matter of
...Thus, we cannot classify the appeal as spurious or frivolous, and must therefore deny the request. Allstate Insurance Company v. Industrial Commission, 126 Ariz. 425, 616 P.2d 100 (App.1980). For the foregoing reasons, the judgment is FROEB, P.J., and GRANT, J., concur. 1 All references to ......