Settlement Covered Successive Claim 

Claimant settled an earlier claim for repetitive injury to the “left upper extremity [,]” then made a later claim related to claimant’s left wrist, which the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission denied because of the settlement. Claimant challenged that conclusion of law as if it were a finding of fact, and so used an inapplicable analysis, but the Court of Appeals can nonetheless discern the challenge raised in claimant’s brief. The settlement “included pain in the left shoulder and numbness and tingling in the left hand, both of which are anatomical components of the left upper extremity [,]” and medical evidence showed that the wrist injury had the same cause as the rest of the earlier claim. The Commission did not err in concluding that the Commission had no authority over the later claim. 
Ronald Lamy vs. Stahl Specialty Company 
(Overview Summary) 
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District – WD85163

This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply