PERS v. Dozier


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2007-SA-01432-COA
Linked Case(s): 2007-SA-01432-SCT ; 2007-CT-01432-SCT ; 2007-CT-01432-SCT

Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 10-21-2008
Opinion Author: KING, C.J.
Holding: Affirmed

Additional Case Information: Topic: Disability benefits - Substantial evidence of disability
Judge(s) Concurring: Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Irving, Chandler, Griffis, Barnes, Ishee, Roberts, and Carlton, JJ.
Procedural History: Admin or Agency Judgment
Nature of the Case: CIVIL - STATE BOARDS AND AGENCIES

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 01-25-2007
Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court
Judge: Tomie Green
Disposition: REVERSED AND REMANDED DECISION DENYING DISABILITY BENEFITS
Case Number: 251-04-0248CIV

  Party Name: Attorney Name:   Brief(s) Available:
Appellant: PUBLIC EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT SYSTEM




MARY MARGARET BOWERS



 

Appellee: JOYCE DOZIER GEORGE S. LUTER  

Synopsis provided by:

If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals
hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office.

Topic: Disability benefits - Substantial evidence of disability

Summary of the Facts: Joyce Dozier applied for disability and retirement benefits with the Public Employees’ Retirement System. PERS denied Dozier’s application, stating that there was insufficient objective evidence to support Dozier’s claim that her medical condition prevented her from performing her duties as a teacher. Dozier appealed to circuit court which reversed and remanded the case. PERS appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: PERS argues that its decision to deny Dozier’s claim for disability benefits was supported by substantial evidence and was neither arbitrary nor capricious because the objective evidence in the record was insufficient to establish disability. Disability is defined as the inability to perform the usual duties of employment or the incapacity to perform such lesser duties without material reduction in compensation. PERS is required to base its decision upon the evidence in the record before the agency. The record shows that PERS’s decision to deny Dozier disability benefits is not supported by substantial evidence. Two doctors determined that Dozier’s medical conditions prevented her from working. Additionally, another doctor determined that Dozier’s decreased strength impaired her ability to perform her duties as a teacher. PERS even sought independent medical evaluations from two doctors, one of whom deferred to the opinions of other physicians in regard to non-psychiatric issues and the other of whom determined that Dozier was not disabled based on her complaints of low back pain and fibromyalgia but deferred a diagnosis of malignant hypertension to an internist. The internist listed Dozier’s hypertension as one of the reasons why Dozier was unable to work, and there was no medical opinion submitted to the contrary. An objective review of the facts clearly indicates that the record is void of any evidence supporting PERS’s denial of Dozier’s disability benefits. PERS’s rejection of the physicians’ medical opinions as purely subjective assessments of Dozier’s condition was improper. PERS cannot choose to ignore uncontroverted evidence provided by the treating physicians.


Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court