Ryan Chrz V. Mower County, A22-0792 (Supreme Court – March 8, 2023)
The Supreme Court addressed the issue of whether an employee demonstrates “disablement resulting from an occupational disease” under Minn. Stat. § 176.66, subd. 1 (2022) when he formerly had, but no longer has, a diagnosis of PTSD by a licensed professional using the DSM-5.
Employee began serving as Deputy Sheriff on November 5, 2007. During his employment with over the next 12½ years, he experienced many traumatic events involving violence and death. Eventually, on September 25, 2019, Employee was evaluated by Dr. Nicole Slavik, a licensed psychologist and using the DSM-5, Dr. Slavik diagnosed Employee with PTSD, major depressive disorder in partial remission, and mild alcohol use disorder in early remission. Dr. Slavik attributed the PTSD diagnosis to Employee exposure to traumatic events while performing his duties as a deputy sheriff.
On March 31, 2020, Employee retired from the Mower County Sheriff’s Office. On May 18, 2020, Employee filed a claim petition, alleging entitlement to workers’ compensation benefits beginning on April 1, 2020. At Mower County’s request, Employee was evaluated by Dr. Paul Arbisi, a licensed psychologist, on October 1, 2020. Dr. Arbisi opined that Employee did not meet all of the criteria for PTSD under the DSM-5. Instead, Dr. Arbisi diagnosed Employee with “Adjustment Disorder, unspecified” and “Alcohol Use Disorder, moderate in self-reported remission.” On March 30, 2021, Dr. Slavik reevaluated Employee at his attorney’s request. This time, Dr. Slavik concluded that Employee symptoms had improved and that he no longer met the DSM-5 criteria for PTSD. Specifically, Dr. Slavik opined that Employee no longer met DSM-5 Criterion G, which relates to whether Employee illness “causes clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.” Instead, Dr. Slavik diagnosed Employee with “other specified trauma and stressor related disorder,” major depressive disorder in partial remission, and a mild alcohol use disorder in remission.
This case went to hearing and on June 2, 2021 to determine whether Employee sustained a compensable work injury and whether he has entitled to workers’ compensation benefits. The Comp judge found the opinion of Dr. Slavik more persuasive than that of Dr. Arbisi. The compensation judge also found that Employee “sustained a work-related occupational disease in the nature of post-traumatic stress disorder arising out of and in the course of his employment with the employer on April 30, 2019.” The compensation judge awarded temporary total disability, rehabilitation, PPD, mileage expenses, and medical care benefits from April 1, 2020, to the present and continuing. This case was appealed by Mower County and the Minnesota Counties Intergovernmental Trust appealed, arguing that the compensation judge erred by granting Employee workers’ compensation benefits after March 30, 2021, the date on which Dr. Slavik concluded that Employee no longer had a formal diagnosis of PTSD.
In a split decision, the Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals reversed in part, concluding that Employee was ineligible for workers’ compensation benefits after March 30, 2021. The majority noted that as of March 30, 2021, no licensed provider concluded that Employee had PTSD as described in the DSM-5. The majority explained that only PTSD diagnosed by a licensed provider using the DSM-5 is a compensable “occupational disease” under the Workers’ Compensation Act. As of March 30, 2021, however, Dr. Slavik diagnosed Employee with “other specified trauma and stressor related disorder,” finding that Employee did not meet all of the DSM-5 criteria for PTSD. Because “other specified trauma and stressor related disorder” is not a compensable occupational disease, the majority concluded that Employee occupational disease was resolved, and he was no longer eligible for workers’ compensation benefits.
The Employee sought review of the Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals decision by writ of certiorari. The central question for the Supreme Court of Minnesota was whether Employee who was previously diagnosed with PTSD but as of March 30, 2021, no longer had a diagnosis of PTSD by a licensed professional using the DSM-5, has demonstrated that he has a “disablement resulting from an occupational disease” continuing after March 30, 2021, into the present.
Employee argued that under section 176.66, there are three steps to determine the compensability of an occupational disease: (1) decide whether the employee has an occupational disease, (2) determine whether the employee experiences “disablement resulting from” that occupational disease, and (3) determine the benefits to which the employee is entitled. Employee argues that the compensation judge cannot “backtrack” in these steps, in that once an employee has been diagnosed with a compensable occupational disease, an employee is not required to “demonstrate that he continues to have the occupational disease.” According to Employee’s counsel, if an employee still experiences disablement, even if he no longer has a diagnosis that meets the statutory definition of “occupational disease,” Employee asserts that he is still entitled to workers’ compensation benefits.
The Supreme Court noted that eligibility for workers’ compensation benefits arises when there is “[t]he disablement of an employee resulting from an occupational disease.” Minn. Stat. § 176.66, subd. 1. The Supreme Court noted that Employee attempted to read into the statute a one-way, three-step framework for determining eligibility for benefits. But the statute says nothing of Employee proposed framework. The Supreme Court noted that the plain language of the statute states that to prove eligibility for workers’ compensation benefits at any given time, three elements must be simultaneously met: (1) the employee has an “occupational disease,” (2) the employee experiences “disablement,” and (3) the disablement “result[s] from” the occupational disease. The Supreme Court note that the only mental impairment that is an “occupational disease” eligible for workers’ compensation benefits is PTSD, and only when that PTSD is diagnosed by a licensed psychiatrist or psychologist using the most recently published edition of the DSM (presently, the DSM-5). And it was undisputed that as of March 30, 2021, Employee no longer had a diagnosis of PTSD from any licensed professional using the DSM-5. As of March 30, 2021, Employee no longer met the “occupational disease” element of section 176.66, and therefore could no longer establish a claim for workers’ compensation benefits.
As such, the Supreme Court of Minnesota affirmed the decision of the Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals.