DORIS J. JOHNSON, Employee/Appellant, v. APPLE VALLEY HEALTH CARE CTR., and LUMBERMEN=S UNDERWRITING ALLIANCE, Employer-Insurer, and SPECIAL COMPENSATION FUND.
WORKERS= COMPENSATION COURT OF APPEALS
NOVEMBER 12, 2004
No. WC04-195
HEADNOTES
APPEALS - INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS. The pretrial order determining the nature of the proceeding to be held before the compensation judge does not constitute a final determination of the rights of the parties on the merits nor is it decisive of any substantive or ultimate right of the parties. The employee=s appeal is premature and this court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to consider the appeal.
Appeal dismissed.
Determined by Johnson, C.J., Wilson, J., and Pederson, J.
Compensation Judge: Rolf G. Hagen
Attorneys: Raymond R. Peterson, McCoy, Peterson & Jorstad, Minneapolis, MN, for the Appellant. Timothy P. Jung, Cronan Pearson Quinlivan, P.A., Minneapolis, MN, for the Respondents.
OPINION
THOMAS L. JOHNSON, Judge
The employee appeals from the compensation judge=s pretrial order regarding the nature of the proceedings to be held before the compensation judge. The court concludes that a pretrial order is not an appealable order and the employee=s appeal is dismissed.
BACKGROUND
Doris J. Johnson, the employee, sustained a personal injury to her left and right wrists on January 5, 1990 while working as a cook for Apple Valley Health Care Center, the employer. The employer and insurer admitted liability and paid workers= compensation benefits to the employee.
In December of 1992, the parties entered into a Stipulation for Settlement in which they agreed the employee had been permanently and totally disabled as of May 4, 1992, and agreed to pay ongoing permanent total disability benefits to the employee. The parties also agreed the employee=s benefits would be reduced under Minn. Stat. ' 176.101, subd. 4, in the event the employee was awarded Social Security disability benefits. They further agreed the employee would be entitled to supplementary benefits from the Special Compensation Fund commencing January 5, 1994. An Award on Stipulation was served and filed on December 17, 1992.
On February 14, 2003, the employer and insurer filed a petition to discontinue permanent total disability benefits and, in the alternative, a petition to vacate the award on stipulation. In a decision filed October 7, 2003, this court denied the petition to discontinue benefits. The court, however, concluded the newly discovered information that the employee worked for three years following the settlement, together with the medical and vocational opinions submitted by the petitioners raised the question of whether the employee=s condition had changed such that she was no longer permanently and totally disabled. The case was referred to the Office of Administrative Hearings for an evidentiary hearing. The court directed the compensation judge to determine Awhether the employee is permanently and totally disabled under the Schulte standard. The employer and insurer shall have the burden of going forward to establish a prima-facie case that the employee is not permanently and totally disabled. The compensation judge should also make findings as to the employee=s current diagnosis and physical restrictions.@ Johnson v. Apple Valley Health Care Center, slip op. (W.C.C.A. Oct. 7, 2003).
A pretrial was held before Compensation Judge Rolf G. Hagen at which time counsel for the parties presented their position regarding their interpretation of the decision of the Workers= Compensation Court of Appeals. The parties apparently disputed the nature of the proceedings to be held before the compensation judge and disagreed upon the evidence required to be submitted. By an Order issued May 24, 2004, the compensation judge directed as follows:
1. This case will be treated as an evidentiary hearing to address the merits of the claim that the employee continues to be permanently totally disabled.
2. Specific findings will be made relative to the employee=s current diagnosis and restrictions.
3. The parties should commence discovery immediately including the scheduling of any and all medical/vocational testimony necessary for either the prosecution or defense of this claim.
4. The initial burden on this case shall be on the defense to prove a prima facie case that the employee is no longer permanently total disabled. The burden will then shift to the employee to prove that the employee has been and continues to be permanently totally disabled at this time as a consequent [sic] of her work injury.
5. This order is being issued pursuant to the request of the parties. In the event that no appeal to the Workers= Compensation Court of Appeals is taken from this order, the case will be scheduled for trial at the earliest mutually agreeable date.
The employee appeals from the compensation judge=s order.
DECISION
Minn. Stat. ' 176.421, subd. 1, provides that appeals to this court can be taken from Aan award or disallowance of compensation, or other order affecting the merits of the case.@ See generally Mierau v. Alcon Indus., Inc., 386 N.W.2d 741, 38 W.C.D. 652 (Minn. 1986).
As a general rule, only an order which finally determines the rights of the parties and concludes the action is appealable. Zizak v. Despatch Indus., Inc., 427 N.W.2d 755 (Minn. App. 1988). The policy behind the general rule is to prevent piecemeal appeals and protect the rights of all the parties until all claims have been adjudicated in the trial court. Johnson v. Johnson, 363 N.W.2d 355, 357, (Minn. App. 1985)(citing Comment Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 104.10), pet. for rev. denied (Minn. May 6, 1985). The compensation judge=s pretrial order does not constitute a final determination of the rights of the parties on the merits nor is it decisive of any substantive or ultimate right of the litigants. Accordingly, the employee=s appeal is premature and this court lacks jurisdiction to consider the appeal of the employee from the pretrial order. The employee=s appeal is dismissed.