Case Title: IN THE MATTER OF THE INJURY TO: DORENE BEYER ABAS F/K/A DORENE BEYER, AN EMPLOYEE OF: AMAX COAL COMPANY. DORENE BEYER ABAS F/K/A DORENE BEYER v. THE STATE OF WYOMING, EX REL. WYOMING WORKER'S COMPENSATION DIVISION

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: wyoming

Court: Wyoming Supreme Court

Date: 1985-07-03T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE MATTER OF THE INJURY TO: DORENE BEYER ABAS F/K/A DORENE BEYER, AN EMPLOYEE OF: AMAX COAL COMPANY. DORENE BEYER ABAS F/K/A DORENE BEYER v. THE STATE OF WYOMING, EX REL. WYOMING WORKER'S COMPENSATION DIVISION1985 WY 80701 P.2d 1153Case Number: 84-253Decided: 07/03/1985Supreme Court of Wyoming
IN THE MATTER OF THE 
INJURY TO: DORENE BEYER ABAS F/K/A DORENE BEYER, AN EMPLOYEE OF: AMAX COAL 
COMPANY. DORENE BEYER ABAS F/K/A DORENE BEYER, APPELLANT (EMPLOYEE-CLAIMANT), 

v. 

THE STATE OF 
WYOMING, EX REL. WYOMING WORKER'S 
COMPENSATION DIVISION, APPELLEE (RESPONDENT).

 
 
Appeal from the District 
Court, CampbellCounty, Terrence L. 
O'Brien, J.

 
 
John S. Wolfe of 
Banks, Johnson, Wolfe & Hallock, Gillette, for appellant.

Randal R. Arp of 
Morgan & Brorby, Gillette, for employer Amax Coal Co.

A.G. McClintock, 
Atty. Gen., Gerald A. Stack, Deputy Atty. Gen., John W. Renneisen, Senior Asst. 
Atty. Gen., Terry J. Harris, Asst. Atty. Gen., Cheyenne, for appellee.

Before THOMAS, C.J., and 
ROSE, ROONEY, BROWN and CARDINE, JJ.

BROWN, 
Justice.

[¶1.]     This is an appeal from 
the district court's denial of additional temporary total worker's compensation 
benefits to appellant Abas. Appellant applied for an award of temporary total 
disability benefits under § 27-12-402, W.S. 1977 (June 1983 Replacement), after 
she had previously received a rating of permanent partial disability and 
received a lump sum award under § 27-12-403, W.S. 1977, based upon such 
rating.

[¶2.]     We will 
affirm.

[¶3.]     Appellant presents a 
single issue for our review:

"Under Wyoming Statute 
Section 27-12-606, is an injured employee entitled to temporary total disability 
benefits under Wyoming Statutes Section 27-12-402, when said employee is totally 
disabled temporarily, after said employee has received a rating of permanent 
partial disability and received a lump sum amount, in light of the language in 
Wyoming Statute Section 27-12-606 stating:

"`Where an award of 
compensation has been made in favor of or on behalf of an employee for any 
benefits under this Act [Sections 27-12-101 to 27-12-804], an application may be 
made to the Clerk of District Court by any party within four (4) years from the 
date of the last award, or at any time during which monthly payments under an 
award are being made, for additional benefits of any type or nature or for a 
modification of the amount of the award on the ground of increase or decrease of 
incapacity due solely to the injury, or upon grounds of mistake or 
fraud'?"

I

[¶4.]     Appellant was injured 
on December 4, 1980, while operating a dump truck in the employ of Amax Coal 
Company. She was treated for "cervical muscle neck spasms and symptoms of 
stretched cervical nerves." The treating physician allowed appellant to return 
to work eleven days after the accident. The pain in appellant's neck and back 
persisted until February 16, 1981, when it was recommended that she stay home 
from work.

[¶5.]     Several surgeries were 
performed on appellant's back after the accident. On December 13, 1981, 
exploratory surgery was performed and an unstable junction was discovered in 
appellant's lower back between the L-4 and L-5 vertebrae. On January 14, 1982, 
appellant underwent her first posterior lateral fusion of the L-4 vertebra down 
through the S-1 vertebra.1

[¶6.]     On April 7, 1982, the 
trial court awarded worker's compensation benefits to appellant in the form of 
temporary total disability and payment of medical bills resulting from her 
injuries. By letter dated July 8, 1982, appellant's surgeon, Dr. Berkebile, 
wrote to the clerk of the district court, indicating he expected appellant to 
remain on temporary total disability status for approximately six to twelve 
months from the January 14, 1982, surgery. He further indicated that he 
estimated appellant's injury would result in a 25 percent permanent partial 
disability. On October 15, 1982, Dr. Berkebile indicated in a note that 
appellant "may return to plant attendant type of work as of November 17, 1982." 
However, there is no showing that appellant ever returned to 
work.

[¶7.]     Appellant subsequently 
petitioned the district court for permanent partial disability compensation 
which was awarded in the amount of $7,500 by the court on January 24, 1983. 
After this amount was exhausted, appellant again applied for temporary total 
disability benefits which were awarded by the district court on April 4, 1984, 
for the period beginning August 30, 1983, and terminating on April 6, 
1984.

[¶8.]     After appellant 
continued to suffer back pain due to the incomplete fusion of her back, 
additional medical advice was received from various physicians who indicated 
further surgery was needed. Consequently, appellant petitioned for further 
temporary total disability benefits. The district court denied the petition by 
order filed September 4, 1984, finding:

"1. That the employee was 
granted a permanent partial disability award of 25% to the body as a whole, for 
the injury sustained on the 4th day of December, 1980.

"2. That said payment was 
made in a lump sum.

"3. That an award of 
permanent partial disability prevents the employee claimant from receiving 
further temporary total disability benefits.

"IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, 
ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the employee's request for temporary total disability 
benefits from April 7, 1984 through the present date be 
denied."

[¶9.]     From this order, 
appellant brings the present appeal. 

II

[¶10.]  We begin by stating the applicable 
standards of review. When reviewing cases on appeal, we accept the evidence of 
the prevailing party as true, leaving out entirely the consideration of evidence 
presented by the unsuccessful party in conflict therewith, giving every 
favorable inference which may fairly and reasonably be drawn from the prevailing 
party's evidence. Stockton v. Sowerwine, Wyo., 690 P.2d 1202 (1984); and City of Rock Springs v. Police Protection Association, 
Wyo., 610 P.2d 975 (1980). The findings of fact made by the trial court are presumed to be 
correct, and we will not disturb such findings unless inconsistent with the 
evidence, clearly erroneous or contrary to the great weight of the evidence. Palmeno v. Cashen, Wyo., 627 P.2d 163 (1981); and Rocky Mountain Turbines, 
Inc. v. 660 Syndicate, Inc., Wyo., 623 P.2d 758 
(1981).

[¶11.]  We have held that worker's compensation 
statutes are to be liberally construed to effectuate their beneficent purpose. 
Conn v. Ed Wederski Construction Company, 
Wyo., 668 P.2d 649 (1983); Matter of Johner, Wyo., 643 P.2d 932 (1982); Mor, Inc. v. Haverlock, Wyo., 
566 P.2d 219 (1977). The purpose of such construction is to require the industry 
to bear the burden of industrial accidents, not the injured worker. But we 
cannot ignore clear statutory language and apply worker's compensation statutes 
to situations that do not reasonably fall within the intended ambit of such 
laws. Matter of Van Matre, Wyo., 657 P.2d 815 (1983); and Alco of Wyoming v. Baker, Wyo., 651 P.2d 266 
(1982).

[¶12.]  As stated earlier, appellant requested 
that the court award her further temporary total disability benefits. Her 
request was brought under § 27-12-606, W.S. 1977 (June 1983 Replacement), which 
provides:

"Where an award of 
compensation has been made in favor of or on behalf of an employee for any 
benefits under this act [§§ 27-12-101 through 27-12-804], an application may be 
made to the clerk of district court by any party within four (4) years from the 
date of the last award, or at any time during which monthly payments under an 
award are being made, for additional benefits of any type or nature or for a 
modification of the amount of the award on the ground of increase or decrease of 
incapacity due solely to the injury, or upon grounds of mistake or 
fraud."

[¶13.]  We think the trial court was correct in 
denying such request. Although appellant petitioned for further temporary total 
disability benefits, it is clear from her brief that she sought the award of 
additional benefits based upon a change in her condition. Rule 15(b), Wyoming 
Rules of Civil Procedure, contemplates a trial on issues not raised by the 
pleadings. Bragg v. Marion, Wyo., 663 P.2d 505 (1983). Appellant's treating 
physician, Dr. Berkebile, had rated appellant's injury as a 25 percent permanent 
partial disability and appellant had received $7,500 based on such rating, 
before her request for further temporary total disability benefits. And even 
though further surgery was indicated to treat appellant's back, there was no 
showing that her 25 percent permanent partial disability rating was changed in 
any way.

[¶14.]  We have held that questions regarding the 
extent and duration of a claimant's disability are questions of fact to be 
determined by the trial court and shall be reviewed as such. Pacific Power and Light v. Parsons, 
Wyo., 692 P.2d 226 (1984). In Conn v. Ed Wederski 
Construction Company, supra, we considered the issue of when a claimant can 
reopen his worker's compensation case under § 27-12-606 based upon mistake. We 
held the claimant in that case had failed to prove his back injury had been 
improperly diagnosed and upheld the district court's denial of claimant's 
petition to reopen his case:

"* * * An award, being 
characterized as a judicial determination, is subject to the concept of 
finality. Given this proposition, § 27-12-606, W.S. 1977, represents an attempt 
by the legislature to balance the concept of finality as applied to worker's 
compensation awards with the need to assure that injured workmen receive the 
full amount of any benefits to which they are entitled under the law. The 
grounds, however, for reopening are limited. * * *" Conn v. Ed Wederski Construction Company, 
supra, at 653.

[¶15.]  In the present case, appellant was 
awarded temporary total disability benefits on two separate occasions: for the 
majority of the period extending from December of 1980 through December of 1982, 
and for the period beginning on August 30, 1983, and terminating on April 6, 
1984. During the interim of these two periods, appellant was awarded a lump sum 
for her 25 percent permanent partial disability rating. We find, therefore, that 
the trial court was correct in denying appellant's petition for further 
temporary total disability benefits, nor has appellant met her burden of showing 
an increase of incapacity.2

[¶16.]  Affirmed.

1 The unstable junction 
was located in appellant's lower back, between lumbar vertebrae numbers 4 and 5. 
The post lateral fusion operation connected lumbar vertebrae 4 and 5 with the 
sacral vertebra number 1. The operative procedure for a posterior lateral fusion 
is described thusly:

"* * * The incision is 
carried wide laterally to expose the transverse processes of the vertebrae to be 
fused. These are roughened, and broad grafts are used to bridge the space 
between them. This operation has been found useful in cases where extensive 
removal of bone from the posterior elements of the vertebrae (laminectomy) is 
required leaving little available bony surface to which grafts can be applied." 
1B Gray, Attorneys' Textbook of Medicine, ¶ 13A.32(b), p. 13A-42. (3rd Ed. 
1984).

2 The district court 
awarded appellant temporary total disability benefits after she had already 
received a permanent partial rating and award. The propriety of such action has 
not been raised and we need not address it.