« Intoxication Case | Main | Case Law Updates »
Wednesday
Jan182017

USE OF AMA SIXTH EDITION GOES TO OKLAHOMA SUPREME COURT

Finally, nearly 3 years after the effective date of the new comp law in Oklahoma, cases are ripe for appeal to the Supreme Court on the issue of exclusive and mandatory use of the latest edition of the AMA Guides for the evaluation and award of Permanent Partial Disability for non-scheduled injuries, or injuries to the body as a whole.
 
   Two appeals were filed the morning:  Robert Hill v. American Medical Response, Supreme Court No. 115558; and Jared Upton v. City of Tulsa, Supreme Court No. 115557.
 
    In addition, motions were filed, asking the Supreme Court to:
 
(1) retain the appeal, rather than assign to the Court of Civil Appeals;
(2) expedite the appeal because it is estimated that up to 1,000 cases are pending in body as a whole PPD cases; and
(3) combine the cases for disposition.
 
    Claimants are alleging that the exclusive and mandatory use of the AMA Guides is unconstitutional for several reasons:
1. The mandatory use of the AMA Guides under Title 85A is an unconstitutional restraint upon an administrative law judge, the trier of fact.
2. Mandatory use of the AMA Guides is an impermissible legislative predetermination of an adjudicatory scientific fact.
3. Under the doctrine of delegata potestas non potest delegarai, the mandatory use of the AMA Guides constitutes an unlawful delegation of the state’s legislative power to a private, nongovernmental entity, the American Medical Association.
4. The use of the AMA Guides to determine permanent partial disability is a denial of due process because such use shifts the economic burden to the injured worker without a legitimate state interest.
5. The use of the AMA Guides to determine permanent partial disability fails to provide an adequate remedy at law.
6. The use of the AMA Guides, coupled with other cuts in benefits, has destroyed the Grand Bargain, and exclusive remedy in workers’ compensation is dead.
7. The use of the AMA Guides is contrary to the Daubert standard for expert evidence required by the AWCA.

 

  
SmileBob Burke, attorney and author
308 N.W. 13th Street, Suite 200B
Oklahoma City, OK 73103
bob@bobburkelaw.com

Reader Comments

There are no comments for this journal entry. To create a new comment, use the form below.

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>