State ex rel. v. Teachers Retirement Bd.
| Decision Date | 30 May 2007 |
| Docket Number | No. 2006-1741.,2006-1741. |
| Citation | 2007 Ohio 2337,113 Ohio St.3d 438,866 N.E.2d 483 |
| Parties | The STATE ex rel. HULLS, Appellant, v. STATE TEACHERS RETIREMENT BOARD OF OHIO, Appellee. |
| Court | Ohio Supreme Court |
Manos, Martin, Pergram & Dietz Co., L.P.A., and James M. Dietz, Delaware, for appellant.
Marc Dann, Attorney General, and John E. Patterson, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
{¶ 1} This is an appeal from the denial of a writ of mandamus to compel appellee, State Teachers Retirement Board of Ohio, to reinstate the disability-retirement benefits of appellant, Edward M. Hulls, and to pay those benefits from the date that the retirement board terminated them. Because we hold that the retirement board did not abuse its discretion by ordering more than one medical examination of Hulls in the same year, we affirm.
{¶ 2} Hulls was employed as a teacher for 19 years at the Southeast Career Center in Columbus, Ohio, where he taught plumbing. Hulls stopped teaching in May 1996.
{¶ 3} In December 1996, Hulls filed an application for disability-retirement benefits with the State Teachers Retirement System of Ohio. In his application, Hulls described the nature of his disability as follows:
{¶ 4}
{¶ 5} In support of his application, Hulls submitted reports from his psychologist, John H. Mason, Ph.D., and his physician, Paul Whetstone, M.D. They both certified that as of May 1996, Hulls was permanently incapacitated for the performance of his duties as a teacher. Mason diagnosed Hulls as suffering from "Major Depression, Recurrent, Severe" and Dr. Whetstone diagnosed Hulls with depression.
{¶ 6} The retirement board referred Hulls to psychiatrist Jerold H. Altman, M.D., for a psychiatric examination. According to Dr. Altman, Hulls noted that he had always loved teaching until around 1994, when the students became more disruptive and the school administrators failed to support the teachers. Hulls stated that although he saw Mason every four to six weeks, he did not think that the treatment was helping him much. In 1994, Hulls bought a restaurant, and he now helps his mother run it. He also does some plumbing and remodeling work. Dr. Altman concluded that Hulls was permanently and completely impaired on a psychiatric basis "[d]ue to his lack of ability to develop insight and to tolerate and deal with the situation."
{¶ 7} Earl N. Metz, M.D., the chairman of the medical review board for the retirement board, recommended approval of Hulls's application for disability-retirement benefits on the condition that Hulls secure psychiatric treatment. Hulls agreed to obtain psychiatric treatment or continue with the treatment he had been receiving for the previous two years.
{¶ 8} The retirement board approved Hulls's application and began paying him disability-retirement benefits.
{¶ 9} In 1998, the retirement board ordered Hulls to be reexamined by Dr. Altman in order to determine whether his benefits should be continued. Dr. Altman examined Hulls and noted that since his retirement from teaching, Hulls's condition had "markedly improved." Dr. Altman nevertheless recommended that Hulls not return to teaching, because "[a]lthough there is no psychiatric disorder now, certainly his feeling the threat of having to return to such a teaching environment causes marked anxiety and depressed mood."
{¶ 10} Charles F. Wooley, M.D., George H. Lohrman, M.D., and Ernest L. Mazzaferri, M.D., members of the medical review board, reviewed Dr. Altman's new report. Dr. Wooley and Dr. Mazzaferri concluded that Hulls was not permanently incapacitated from performing his job and recommended that his disability-retirement benefits be terminated. Dr. Lohrman was uncertain whether Hulls remained disabled and recommended either discussing the case in a special conference or ordering another psychiatric evaluation.
{¶ 11} The retirement board then ordered Hulls to have another psychiatric examination, this time by Stephen F. Pariser, M.D. Dr. Pariser diagnosed Hulls with major depression, single episode, in full remission, as well as adjustment disorder with depressed mood, and panic disorder. Dr. Pariser concluded that Hulls "could return to work, either in a classroom setting with better adjusted students or as a plumber in a school system" and that "[s]hould symptoms of depression or panic re-emerge, he should be promptly seen by a psychiatrist and treated with an antidepressant."
{¶ 12} In July 1998, the medical review board agreed with Dr. Pariser's opinion and recommended that Hulls's disability retirement be terminated. The disability-review committee of the retirement board, however, rejected the medical review board's recommendation and instead recommended that Hulls's disability-retirement benefits be continued. Based on this recommendation, Hulls's benefits continued.
{¶ 13} About five years later, in September 2003, the retirement board ordered Hulls to be reexamined to determine whether his disability-retirement benefits should be continued. Pursuant to the board's order, Hulls was examined by psychiatrist Richard H. Clary, M.D. In his September 29, 2003 report, Dr. Clary concluded that Hulls should continue to receive disability-retirement benefits:
{¶ 14} "Mr. Hulls has been receiving appropriate psychiatric treatment since 1994. He continues to treat with Dr. Mason, a psychologist. Mr. Hulls said he has not been involved in the plumbing business now for several years and operates a bar and restaurant. I do have some concern about his alcohol intake and he said he drinks about a case of beer per week or about 3 beers per day.
{¶ 15} "In my medical opinion, Mr. Hulls is unable to return to his job at Southeast Career Center teaching plumbing and he should continue on long term disability."
{¶ 16} Less than a month after receiving Dr. Clary's report, the retirement board ordered that Hulls be examined by another psychiatrist, Michael R. Mizenko, D.O. According to Dr. Metz, the chairman of the medical review board, the additional examination was prompted by a misstatement in Dr. Clary's report that Hulls had received psychiatric treatment and by the fact that there had been no diagnosis of Hulls having any major psychiatric disorder for several years:
{¶ 17} "[A] follow-up exam was done by Dr. Richard Clary in September 2003. Dr. Clary noted an absence of psychiatric symptoms. Oddly, Dr. Clary commented that Mr. Hulls `* * * has been receiving appropriate psychiatric treatment since 1994,' even though the record does not show that Mr. Hulls has ever seen a psychiatrist other than [State Teachers Retirement System] examiners, nor has he taken any anti-depressant or anti-anxiety medications other than a short trial of Zoloft which he found to be not helpful, and he has never had a psychiatric hospital admission. Nevertheless, Dr. Clary made a diagnosis of dysthymic disorder and recommended continuation of the disability.
{¶ 18} "Being on disability retirement for more than six years without a major psychiatric diagnosis or symptoms seemed out of the ordinary to the Medical Review Board so yet another psychiatric examination was scheduled the following month— this time with Dr. Michael Mizenko." (Emphasis sic.)
{¶ 19} Dr. Mizenko examined Hulls on October 29, 2003, and concluded that Hulls's disability-retirement benefits should not be continued, because he is capable of resuming full-time teaching duties. Dr. Mizenko diagnosed Hulls with "Major Depression Disorder, Recurrent, Severe, in full remission." (Emphasis sic.) Dr. Mizenko observed that Hulls had recovered from his depressive disorder and that the potential for a reoccurrence of his disability did not constitute a permanent psychiatric disability:
{¶ 20} "The medical records in Mr. Hulls' report clearly indicate that at the time of his initial application for disability status with [the State Teachers Retirement System] of Ohio, he was seriously depressed with associated somatic and anxiety symptoms. With a break from teaching and the benefit of treatment, Mr. Hulls recovered from his depressive disorder. He has not experienced a reoccurrence to date. At this time, Mr. Hulls' psychotherapy treatment is an empty exercise (only satisfying the expectations of [the State Teachers Retirement System]), and he is not interested in working on what seems to be his limited motivation and capacity to work through challenging and difficult circumstances.
He refuses to consider an adaptive strategy to reposition his mental attitude in the service of finding a way to function in the workplace. Of course, he is not taking any psychotropic medication because he does not view himself as having a psychiatric condition.
{¶ 21} ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. v. State Med. Bd. of Ohio
...and phrases in context and construing them in accordance with the rules of grammar and common usage. State ex rel. Hulls v. State Teachers Retirement Bd. of Ohio, 113 Ohio St.3d 438, 2007-Ohio-2337, 866 N.E.2d 483, at ¶ 32. Moreover, we read words and phrases in a statute in the context of ......
-
State ex rel. Citizens v. Register
... ... Lecklider v ... 876 N.E.2d 921 ... School Emps. Retirement Sys., 104 Ohio St.3d 271, 2004-Ohio-6586, 819 N.E.2d 289, ¶ 23; State ex rel. Boccuzzi v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Commrs., 112 Ohio St.3d 438, ... See, e.g., State ex rel. Hulls ... 116 Ohio St.3d 98 ... v. State Teachers Retirement Bd., 113 Ohio St.3d 438, 2007-Ohio-2337, 866 N.E.2d 483, ¶ 35 (court cannot add words to or delete words from statutes) ... Attorney ... ...
-
State ex rel. Nese v. State Teachers Ret. Bd. of Ohio
...to the instructors if they show that the STRS abused its discretion in making its determination. See State ex rel. Hulls v. State Teachers Retirement Bd. of Ohio, 113 Ohio St.3d 438, 2007-Ohio-2337, 866 N.E.2d 483, ¶ 27 (applying abuse-of-discretion standard to the retirement board's determ......
-
Community Health Professionals v. Levin
... ... Visiting Nurses Association ("Visiting Nurses") incorporated in the state of Ohio with the purpose of providing in-home nursing services for the ... ...