Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Mathison v. Corroon

Court of Workers Compensation of Montana

November 22, 1994

CAROL MATHISON Petitioner
v.
WILLIS CORROON Respondent/Insurer for YELLOWSTONE COUNTY Employer.

          FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND JUDGMENT

          Mike McCarter JUDGE

         The trial in this matter was held in Billings, Montana, on November 14, 1994. The petitioner, Ms. Carol Mathison (claimant), was present and represented herself. Respondent, Willis Corroon (insurer), was represented by Mr. Norman H. Grosfield. The claimant and her husband, Mr. Marvin Mathison, were sworn and testified. Exhibits 1 through 3 were admitted by agreement of the parties. No depositions were taken and the matter was deemed submitted at the end of trial.

         Having considered the testimony of claimant and her husband, the exhibits, and the arguments of the parties, the Court makes the following:

         FINDINGS OF FACT

         1. The claimant suffered an industrial injury on October 31, 1986. The primary injury was to her right wrist but in 1988 she also began experiencing headaches and pain in her right shoulder. Over the years she has continued to experience headaches and pain in her shoulder and cervical area. She has been variously diagnosed as suffering from myofascial pain syndrome, fibromyalgia, chronic pain syndrome, and tension myalgia.

         2. The insurer accepted liability for the injury and has paid various medical and compensation benefits.

         3. Claimant and the insurer entered into a full and final compromise settlement which was approved on March 18, 1993. The agreement reserved medical and hospital benefits for the claimant.

         4. At the time of the agreement claimant was receiving physical therapy treatment for her shoulder. She had periodically been receiving treatments since at least 1990.

         5. Claimant last received physical therapy on January 7, 1994. At that time her physical therapist provided her with written instructions for exercises to do on her own. She was discharged from therapy at that time.

         6. Claimant thereafter sought the insurer's approval for additional physical therapy treatment. She testified that she did her exercises after January 7, 1994, and she was doing well until she slipped, caught herself, and experienced renewed pain in her shoulder.

         7. On July 6, 1994, the insurer notified claimant that it was denying further payment for physical therapy.

         8. Over the years claimant has been treated by a number of different physicians. In 1992 Dr. Enrico Arguelles, who is board certified in internal medicine and rheumatology, assumed claimant's regular care. Since then he has seen claimant periodically. His most recent examination of claimant was on October 6, 1994.

         9. Claimant's medical records for the past two and one half years (1992 to 1994) were introduced into evidence at the hearing. Those records show that claimant developed a "dependency" on physical therapy and that the therapy was not providing her medical benefit.

a) On November 2, 1993, Dr. Arguelles recommended that claimant be examined by Dr. William Rosen, a physiatrist, to address claimant's "continuing need for ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.