Preview:

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 8-616 / 07-2093 Filed November 13, 2008

JOHN DEERE DUBUQUE WORKS OF DEERE AND COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellant, vs. DARYL A. HAUGEN, Defendant-Appellee. ________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Alan L. Pearson, Judge.

Employer appeals from the ruling on judicial review from its former employee's workers' compensation action. AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.

Dirk Hamel of Gilloon, Wright & Hamel, P.C., Dubuque, for appellant. Paul J. McAndrew of Paul J. McAndrew Law Firm, Coralville, for appellee.

Considered by Huitink, P.J., and Vogel and Eisenhauer, JJ.

2 VOGEL, J. Daryl Haugen began working for John Deere in 1972. Prior to 2003, he had no permanent work restrictions. In 2004, Haugen filed several workers'

compensation petitions alleging work-related injuries to his right long finger, cervical spine, left shoulder, bilateral upper extremities, and a mental injury or depression. Following a hearing on the consolidated proceedings, a deputy

commissioner issued an arbitration decision concluding Haugen had shown that his cervical and right long finger injuries arose out of and in the course of employment, but that his alleged upper-extremity and mental injuries were not work-related. However, the deputy concluded Haugen failed to prove the

cervical and finger injuries entitled him to any permanent disability. On intraagency appeal, the commissioner largely affirmed, but additionally found that Haugen had suffered a thirty-percent loss of earning capacity as a result of his cervical spine and right long finger injuries, entitling him to permanent partial disability payments. On judicial review, the district court affirmed. John Deere appeals. Our review of an industrial commissioner's decision is for correction of errors at law. Simonson v. Snap-On Tools Corp., 588 N.W.2d 430, 434 (Iowa 1999). When we review the district court's decision, "we apply the standards of chapter 17A to determine whether the conclusions we reach are the same as those of the district court. If they are the same, we affirm; otherwise we reverse." Mycogen Seeds v. Sands, 686 N.W.2d 457, 464 (Iowa 2004). Our role is threefold: (1) determine if the commissioner applied the proper legal standard or interpretation of the law; (2) determine if there was substantial evidence to support the commissioner's findings; and (3) determine if the

3 commissioner's application of the law to the facts was irrational, illogical, or wholly unjustifiable. Clark v. Vicorp Rests., Inc., 696 N.W.2d 596, 603-04 (Iowa 2005). Commissioner's Deference to Deputy. John Deere first claims that the commissioner, in his intra-agency appeal decision, "should have deferred to Deputy Garrison's neck claim assessment which was impacted by express or implied credibility determinations." In particular, John Deere asserts the

commissioner should have deferred to a larger degree regarding the fact-findings underlying the essential question of whether Haugen sustained any industrial disability. We first note that judicial review is from final agency action, not from the deputy's arbitration decision. Iowa Code

Download JOHN DEERE DUBUQUE WORKS OF DEERE AND COMPANY , Plaintiff - Appell ant , vs.

Iowa Law