Ohio Supreme Court Rules that Industrial Commission May Require Second Medical Examination of PTD Applicant

The Ohio Supreme Court was recently faced with the question of whether the Industrial Commission can require a claimant to submit to a second medical examination regarding a single issue.  State ex rel. Mignella v. Indus. Comm. (2019-Ohio-463).

In Mignella, the claimant filed an application for permanent total disability (PTD) benefits.  At the Industrial Commission’s request, Ms. Mignella was examined by Dr. Mease, who reported that she could perform “light physical demand activities,” but could not sit or stand longer than 15 to 20 minutes.  In a subsequent deposition, Dr. Mease admitted that she made errors when examining Ms. Mignella, including not using the American Medical Association guidelines.  Because of the error, a Staff Hearing Officer ruled that the PTD application could not be adjudicated until Ms. Mignella submitted to a second medical examination by a commission specialist.

Ms. Mignella refused to submit to a second examination and, as a result, her PTD application was suspended.  She then filed an action in the Tenth District Court of Appeals seeking a writ ordering the Commission to proceed with the adjudication of her application.  The Court of Appeals denied the writ and the Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the decision.  The Court noted that the Ohio Revised Code gives the commission authority to require any claimant claiming the right to receive compensation to submit to a medical examination.  The Court also noted earlier decisions finding that the commission is not limited on the number of examinations it can schedule on a particular issue so long as the record discloses why additional examinations are necessary.

Employers should remember this case when looking at the commission specialist’s report issued as a result of a PTD application.  If the report is flawed (e.g., internally inconsistent), consideration should be given to requesting a second examination.