Minn. Deputy Establishes PTSD Presumption

Minneapolis, MN (WorkersCompensation.com) -- In many states, presumptions apply that grant workers in certain fields an entitlement to benefits that require employers to rebut the presumption. 

Such is the case in Minnesota, as Juntunen v. Carlton County, No. A-22-0090 (Minn. 12/21/22) showed, for law enforcement officers with post-traumatic stress disorder, questions about which ended up in the state’s highest court. 

A deputy sheriff for a Minnesota county was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder by a licensed psychologist. The day after he received the diagnosis, the deputy informed his supervisors of the diagnosis and was placed on leave. 

During his time as a law enforcement officer, the deputy responded to “many” traumatic events involving violence, death, and sexual abuse. In particular, two events were central to the deputy’s case. 

In the first key event, the deputy responded to the scene of a fatal traffic accident involving a 16-year-old boy who had just passed his driving test. When the deputy arrived, he saw that the boy’s “head was caved halfway into the steering wheel.” At the time, the deputy’s son had recently passed his own driving test. 

In the second key event, the deputy responded to a domestic violence call that led to an encounter in which the suspect pointed a gun at the deputy before turning the gun on himself, telling the deputy to “tell my kids that I love them,” and then pulling the trigger to take his own life. The deputy was then tasked with photographing the scene, and the medical examiner told the deputy that it was his fault the suspect was dead. 

In denying the deputy’s claim for workers’ compensation benefits, the county relied on a psychological evaluation that concluded that the deputy suffered from major depressive disorder that was not related to his employment.  

The compensation judge held in the county’s favor, deciding that the deputy “did not sustain PTSD arising out of and in the scope of his employment. 

The Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals reversed that decision, finding that a statutory presumption had been met that entitled the deputy to benefits. 

The county appealed to court. 

In Minnesota, an employee who works in one of the designated occupations – including law enforcement -- and who had not been previously diagnosed with PTSD is presumptively entitled to workers’ compensation benefits upon presenting a diagnosis of PTSD by a licensed psychiatrist or psychologist, which the employer can rebut by presenting “substantial factors.” 

The court explained that the issue in the case, whether the presumption applies when an employee presents a diagnosis of PTSD or only after a legal determination that the employee’s diagnosis of PTSD is more credible than a competing expert opinion offered by the employer, was an issue of first impression in Minnesota. 

“Based on the plain language of the statute,” the court reasoned, “an employee need only present a diagnosis for the presumption to apply, not that the diagnosis is determined by a compensation judge to be more credible or persuasive than any competing diagnosis offered by an employer.” 

Thus, the presumption applied in the deputy’s case, and the, court held, the county did not rebut it. In the court’s view, the county’s evidence did not suggest that the deputy’s doctor’s evaluations were inaccurate. In fact, the county’s doctor stated that he did not offer any opinion on the validity of the deputy’s doctor’s diagnosis. 

“This evidence does not amount to ‘substantial factors’ that can overcome the PTSD presumption,” the court concluded in ruling in the deputy’s favor. 

Stay up to speed on Minnesota and the rest of the U.S. with a WorkCompResearch subscription