Title: Behr v. Maine Pub. Employees Ret. Sys.

State: maine

Issuer: Maine Supreme Court

Document:

MAINE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT 
Reporter of Decisions 
Decision: 
2016 ME 91 
Docket: 
Ken-15-395 
Submitted 
On Briefs: May 26, 2016 
Decided: 
June 14, 2016 
 
Panel: 
SAUFLEY, C.J., and ALEXANDER, GORMAN, JABAR, HJELM, and HUMPHREY, JJ. 
 
 
SARA J.T. BEHR 
 
v. 
 
MAINE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM 
 
 
PER CURIAM 
[¶1]  Sara J.T. Behr appeals from a judgment entered by the Superior Court 
(Kennebec County, Murphy, J.) affirming the decision of the Maine Public 
Employees Retirement System (MPERS) Board of Trustees (the Board).  The 
Board had affirmed the decision of the executive director’s designee, who had 
denied Behr’s application for disability retirement benefits.  See 5 M.R.S. 
§§ 17451(1), 17925(4) (2015).  Because the record does not compel a finding that 
Behr met her burden to prove that “it is impossible to perform the duties of [her] 
employment position,” 5 M.R.S. § 17921(1)(B) (2015), we affirm. 
[¶2]  In December 2012, Behr filed an application for disability retirement 
benefits, see 5 M.R.S. § 17925 (2015), alleging that she was unable to perform her 
job as a policy development specialist for the Maine Department of Transportation.  
 
2 
Behr asserted that she was disabled due to Lyme disease, mononucleosis, 
fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome, post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, 
anxiety, and insomnia.  On appeal, Behr only challenges the denial of benefits as to 
her fibromyalgia. 
[¶3]  We review directly the Board’s decision.  Kelley v. Me. Pub. Emps. 
Ret. Sys., 2009 ME 27, ¶ 16, 967 A.2d 676.  We will reverse a Board finding that a 
party failed to meet his or her burden of proof “only if the record compels a 
contrary conclusion to the exclusion of any other inference.”  Id.  Contrary to 
Behr’s contentions, the record does not compel a finding that Behr met her burden 
to prove that her fibromyalgia caused functional limitations that made it impossible 
for her to do her job. 
[¶4]  The Board adopted the Hearing Officer’s recommended final decision, 
which found that there were “significant inconsistencies and voids in the evidence 
of medically-based functional limitations,” especially given MPERS’s evidence 
about Behr’s behavior at work.  See 5 M.R.S. § 17106(4)(C) (2015) (contemplating 
that the Board will determine what weight to give the evidence); 5 M.R.S. 
§ 17106-A(3) (2015) (permitting hearing officers to accept, reject, or determine the 
weight to be given any evidence).  For example, Behr’s supervisor testified that he 
observed that Behr’s mood would change depending on whether she was 
interacting socially with coworkers or focusing on her work. 
 
3 
[¶5]  In addition, the Board found that Behr’s evidence regarding her alleged 
functional limitations was less persuasive than the medical board’s reports, 
see 5 M.R.S. § 17106(3)(D) (2015), which the Board properly considered as 
evidence, see Kelley, 2009 ME 27, ¶ 25, 967 A.2d 676.  Here, the medical board 
twice reviewed the entire record and opined that the medical records contained no 
objective medical evidence of any functional limitations caused by Behr’s 
fibromyalgia.  In its second report, the medical board noted that Behr’s significant 
efforts in pursuing her appeal to the Board demonstrated her capacity for sedentary 
work.  Because the medical board’s reports are a proper part of the evidentiary 
record, the record does not compel a contrary finding.  See Anderson v. Me. Pub. 
Emps. Ret. Sys., 2009 ME 134, ¶ 28, 985 A.2d 501 (holding that the record did not 
compel a finding that the employee had proved that her condition would be 
permanent when the medical board had written a report “questioning [the 
employee’s] evidence of permanency”). 
[¶6]  Behr’s remaining arguments on appeal do not warrant discussion. 
The entry is: 
Judgment affirmed.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
4 
 
On the briefs: 
 
Sara J.T. Behr, appellant pro se 
 
Janet T. Mills, Attorney General, and Christopher L. Mann, 
Asst. Atty. Gen., Office of the Attorney General, Augusta, for 
appellee Maine Public Employees Retirement System 
 
 
 
Kennebec County Superior Court docket number AP-2014-74 
FOR CLERK REFERENCE ONLY