ORDER
The attached proposed new Rules 2.1, 2.32, 2.33, and 2.34 of the Rules of Practice of the Workers' Compensation Court promulgated by such court pursuant to the powers conferred upon it under General Laws of Rhode Island, 1956 (1995 Reenactment) § 28-30-12 are hereby approved by the Rhode Island Supreme Court.
Entered as an Order of this Court this 15th day of September 2000.
By Order,
Brian B. Burns Clerk, Pro Tempore
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS
WORKERS' COMPENSATION COURT J. Joseph Garrahy Judicial Complex One Dorrance Plaza Providence, R.I. 02903-3973 August 27, 2000 401-458-5000
The Honorable Joseph R. Weisberger, Chief Justice Rhode Island Supreme Court
250 Benefit Street Providence, Rhode Island 02903
Dear Chief Justice Weisberger:
I have enclosed the proposed amendments and additions to the Rhode Island Workers' Compensation Court rules of procedure which were necessitated by the most recent amendment change passed by the General Assembly and which became law on July 20, 2000. The changes requiring amendment of our rules are effective September 1, 2000.
The rules were drafted in consultation with the Bar Association's Section on Workers' Compensation practice and were reviewed by members of the bar from both the petitioner and respondent's side. Said amendments and additions were agreed to by those parties. The Court me and reviewed the proposed amendments and additions and after discussion, unanimously approved same.
I am sending the proposed changes to you for the Supreme Court's action and have additionally enclosed a copy of the recent legislation.
Very truly yours,
Robert F. Arrigan Chief Judge
RFA:tn
Pursuant to R.I.G.L. § 28.30.12 the members of the Rhode Island Workers' Compensation Court approve the proposed amendments and additions to the Rhode Island Workers' Compensation Court rules of practice and herewith submit the proposed rules to the Rhode Island Supreme Court for their review and approval.
Robert F. Arrigan, Chief Judge John Rotondi, Jr., Judge Andrew E. McConnell, Judge Carmine A. Rao, Judge George E. Healy, Judge Debra L. Olsson, Judge Bruce Q. Morin, Judge Janette A. Bertness, Judge Edward P. Sowa, Judge Dianne M. Commor, Judge II
TRIAL
2.1. CALENDAR . The Chief Judge shall designate a pretrial calendar as necessary to expedite the disposition of cases as outlined in R.I.G.L. § 28-35-20 (a). All cases filed with the Court, excluding appeals from the Department of Labor and Training and from the Medical Advisory Board, Requestsfor anniversary reviews, petitions for settlement pursuant to R.I.G.L. § 28-33-25 and 28-33-25.1 and petitions to determine a controversy involving disputes under the coverage provisions of an insurance policy filed pursuant of R.I.G.L. § 28-30-13 shall be assigned to pretrial conference by the Administrator and placed on the pretrial calendar for a day certain on or before the 21st day from said filing. The Administrator shall notify the parties of the date of said assignment.
2.32 REVIEW OF ACTION BY DEPARTMENT OF LABOR OR MEDICAL ADVISORY BOARD
(A) Any party may file a petition with the court to review a decision of the Department of Labor or a determination of the Medical Advisory Board within thirty (30) days of the date the decision or determination enters.
The petitioner shall file with the court a copy of the decision or determination to be reviewed, along with a concise statement of grounds for appeal. The respondent need not file a response pleading unless required by statute or court order.
(B) The original or a certified copy of the entire record of proceeding under review shall be transmitted to the court within thirty (30) days after the petition is served, unless the court orders otherwise. The court may allow the parties to shorten, correct, or add to the record under review by stipulation.
(C) After a petition is filed, the court shall schedule the parties to submit briefs regarding their respective claims.
(D) The Workers' Compensation Court Rules of Procedure shall govern the proceedings. The court may consider evidence of procedural irregularities at the Department of Labor or the Medical Advisory Board.
(E) The court shall not substitute its judgment for that of the Department of Labor or the Medical Advisory Board regarding the weight of the evidence on questions of fact. The court may affirm, or remand the case for further proceedings. The court may reverse or modify the decision or determination if substantial rights of the petitioner have been prejudiced because the administrative findings, inferences, conclusion, decisions, or determinations are:
(1) In violation of constitutional authority of the agency;
(2) In excess of the statutory authority of the agency;
(3) Made upon unlawful procedure;
(4) Affected by other error of law;
(5) Clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on the whole record; or
(6) Arbitrary or capricious or characterized by abuse of discretion or clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion.
Reporter's Notes. Rule 2.32 implements a new procedure to address the expanded jurisdiction of the court as an appellate body to review the action taken by other departments and agencies under the provisions of the Workers' Compensation Act. In appeals to the Workers' Compensation Court in cases involving the discipline of health care providers by the Medical Advisory Board, the court's role appears to be simply to review the determinations made by the department or agency to ensure that the parties were afforded all substantive and procedural due process rights. Accordingly, the function of the court is analogous to the role of the District or Superior Court in reviewing agency appeals pursuant to R.I.G.L.
§ 42-35-15. Although all proceedings under the provisions of the Workers' Compensation Act are specifically exempted from the Administrative Procedures Act pursuant to R.I.G.L. § 42-35-18 (b) (6-15), the standard of judicial review of administrative actions established by this section provides helpful guidance in this area and indicates the standards which must be met to ensure proper procedural safeguards. Accordingly the review of the actions of the Department of Labor and the Medical Advisory Board is limited to the record developed below to ensure that the action taken was proper. The Workers' Compensation Court may not, however, substitute its judgment for that of the agency or department as to the weight of the evidence on factual issues which have been determined by the department or board.
2.33 APPROVAL OF REHABILITATION PROGRAM
(A) Any party may file a petition with the court to approve a rehabilitation program pursuant to R.I.G.L. § 28-33-41 (b). The petition shall set forth all the pertinent facts regarding the program including, but not limited to, the exact nature of the employee's injury, the length of incapacity, the names and addresses of all medical care providers who have treated the employee and the exact nature of the proposed rehabilitation program.
(B) The petitioner shall attach the following documents to the petition:
(1) A legible copy of the most recent document ordering payment of weekly benefits to the employee along with a copy of the original document(s) establishing liability and describing the nature and location of the work related injuries. (2) Four copies of all medical records pertaining to the diagnosis and treatment of the employee's work injury. (3) Four copies of the rehabilitation provider's report detailing the precise medical restorative services, vocational restorative services or re-employment services recommended for the injured employee.
The Office of the Administrator shall not accept for filing any petition seeking approval of a rehabilitation program unless it is accompanied by all of the necessary documents set forth above.
(C) The Administrator's Office shall refer all filed petitions to the Medical Advisory Board for evaluation by an independent health care review team which shall include a certified rehabilitation provider, evaluator or counselor.
(D) Upon completion of the evaluation by the independent health care review team, the Medical Advisory Board shall return the matter to the Administrator's Office who shall assign the matter to a judge for pretrial conference pursuant to R.I.G.L. § 28-35-20.
2.34 INSURANCE COVERAGE DISPUTES
(A) In any case filed pursuant to the provisions of R.I.G.L. § 28-30-13, involving a dispute regarding coverage under the provisions of a Workers' Compensation insurance agreement the party seeking review of the insurance contract shall file with the administrator's office a petition for determination of an insurance controversy which shall contain (1) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the petitioner is entitled to relief and (2) a prayer setting forth the relief sought by the petitioner. Relief in the alternative or in several different types may be demanded. The petition shall set forth the name, address and agent for service of each respondent.
(B) Within twenty (20) days of the receipt of the petition, the respondent shall file a formal answer to the petition. The answer shall state in plain and concise terms the respondent's defenses to each claim asserted. The answer shall admit or deny each allegation upon which the petitioner relies. In the event that the respondent lacks sufficient knowledge to form a belief regarding the truth of an allegation, the pleading shall so state and such response shall be deemed a denial of the allegation. In the event that the respondent fails to respond to a specific allegation in the petition, such allegation shall be deemed to be admitted.
(C) In the answer, the respondent shall affirmatively set forth any matter constituting an avoidance or affirmative defense. In the event that the respondent fails to plead an avoidance or affirmative defense, such matter shall be deemed to be waived.
(D) Upon the filing of the petition, the Chief Judge of the Workers' Compensation Court shall assign the matter to a judge and the Court shall forthwith notify the parties of the judge to whom the matter has been assigned. All subsequent proceedings shall be conducted before the judge to whom the matter has been assigned except as otherwise provided in these rules.
(E) Following the filing of the petition and the answer, the judge to whom the matter has been assigned shall conduct a scheduling conference at which time the attorneys for all parties shall appear prepared to discuss all pertinent pretrial matters including the order of discovery, the anticipated length of trial and the issues involved in the litigation.
At the close of the conference, the judge shall enter a conference order which shall establish dates for the closing of discovery, the submission of all pretrial memoranda designated by the trial judge, and the trial. Except for good cause shown, the parties shall conclude all pretrial discovery within forty-five (45) days of the date on which the scheduling conference is conducted and the matter shall be assigned to trial within twenty-one (21) days of the date on which discovery is concluded.
(F) Following trial on the merits, the court shall render a decision which responds to the petitioner's prayer for relief and the court shall prepare an appropriate decree pursuant to Rule 2.20 of these rules.