Fogleman v Labor Commission

Fogleman appealed the denial of her claim for permanent total disability benefits. The panel affirmed. It held the Board did not err in not considering injuries not related to her fall at work as the plain language of Utah Code 34A-2-413(b)(1) requires the total disability result from the work injury. Applying deferential review as disability determinations are more fact-like than law-like, the panel held the appeal board’s decision was supported by substantial evidence in the form of the medical panel’s report which demonstrated there was no connection between the fall and Fogleman’s condition which the report concluded was caused by an unrelated back injury, opined that the fall related pain in her knee and hip were not connected to an objectively verifiable injury and concluded Fogleman could work sedentary jobs like the receptionist job she had at the time of the fall. The panel held there was no error in not giving Fogleman the benefit of the doubt as she failed to prove the elements of her disability claim. It finally held that there was no error in not awarding benefits for Fogleman’s depression and anxiety as there was no causal connection between the fall and her depression and anxiety.

State v Riker

Riker appealed his conviction for sodomy with a child. The panel affirmed holding evidence of the victim’s birthdate, the timeframe of the acts and evidence the victim was interviewed by law enforcement before his 14th birthday plus evidence the acts occurred were sufficient to prove the charge.