Case File
Despite a challenge with misattribution of a doctor’s opinion, an ALJ’s decision didn’t commit an error “so flagrant as to cause gross injustice.”
Case
Graybar Electric v. Starr, No. 2025-SC0204-WC (Ky. 02/19/26)
What Happened?
A delivery driver for an electric company pulled a bundle of pipes from a truck and hurt his back. About 15 years earlier, the driver was involved a motor vehicle accident.
Experiencing pain following the work accident, the driver underwent an evaluation. The physician diagnosed the driver as having a history of herniated disk with ongoing radicular pain. The physician opined that the diagnosis directly resulted from the workplace injury and that the driver had reached maximum medical improvement.
A physician for the company disagreed, and opined that the driver experienced chronic degenerative changes from the earlier MVA.
An administrative law judge entered an interlocutory opinion, award, and order, finding that the driver suffered at least a lumbar strain from the work incident. Later the driver underwent surgery, and the ALJ issued a second interlocutory opinion, which found that the surgery was not work-related and non-compensable.
Eventually, the ALJ issued an opinion that awarded temporary total disability and adopting the earlier opinion that found the surgery non-compensable. The company filed a petition for reconsideration that contested the period of the driver’s entitlement to TTD. The ALJ sustained the petition and amended the award.
Although the ALJ incorrectly attributed part of a physician’s causation opinion, other medical evidence independently supported the same conclusion regarding the non-work-related nature of the surgery.
The driver appealed to the Workers’ Compensation Board, which affirmed the ALJ’s opinion and order. The Court of Appeals reversed, concluding that the ALJ’s mistaken belief that the claimant had two prior disc herniations materially affected its analysis and warranted reconsideration of the evidence.
The company appealed to the Kentucky Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Kentucky law established a “clearly erroneous” standard of review for appeals concerning factual findings rendered by an ALJ and is determined based on reasonableness.
What the Kentucky Supreme Court Said
The Kentucky Supreme Court held that the misattribution amounted to harmless error, as substantial evidence still supported the ALJ’s conclusions.
The court found evidence in the record that the driver sustained two disc herniations as the result of the previous MVA based on the two physicians’ opinions, although the ALJ misattributed one of the physician’s opinions.
“Correcting the misattributed opinion, which concerns the work-relatedness of the injury, would be of no additional value,” the court wrote. “Thus, the Board correctly declined to reverse the ALJ’s final order based on the factual misstatement.”
Verdict: The Kentucky Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals’ opinion and reinstated the WCB’s decision affirming the ALJ’s decision.
Takeaway
In a Kentucky workers’ compensation case, minor factual errors in an ALJ’s decision, including misstatements of medical evidence, are unlikely to overturn an award where the overall decision is supported by substantial evidence.
