Review of Awards or Orders Issued by Administrative Law Judges

PURPOSE: This rule outlines procedures for appeals from a final award, order, or decision made by an administrative law judge of the Division of Workers’ Compensation. (1) Review—Appeal. Any interested party in a contested case may appeal from a final award, order, or decision made by an administrative law judge of the Division of Workers’ Compensation by making an application for review within twenty (20) days from the date of the award, order, or decision with the commission as provided by section 287.480, RSMo. A form to be used in making an application for review has been promulgated by the commission and is available upon request. The applicant (known as petitioner) need not use the promulgated form, provided the application sets forth information in regard to the case and award which is sought to be reviewed and the reasons for making the application for a review of the evidence. An application for review shall be signed by the petitioner or the petitioner’s attorney. An application filed on behalf of a corporation shall be signed by an attorney licensed in Missouri. (2) Additional Evidence. (A) After an application for review has been filed with the commission, any interested party may file a motion to submit additional evidence to the commission. The hearing of additional evidence by the commission shall not be granted except upon the ground of newly discovered evidence which with reasonable diligence could not have been produced at the hearing before the administrative law judge. The motion to submit additional evidence shall set out specifically and in detail— 1. The nature and substance of the newly discovered evidence; 2. Names of witnesses to be produced; 3. Nature of the exhibits to be introduced; 4. Full and accurate statement of the reason the testimony or exhibits reasonably could not have been discovered or produced at the hearing before the administrative law judge; 5. Newly discovered medical evidence shall be supported by a medical report signed by the doctor and attached to the petition, shall contain a synopsis of the doctor’s opinion, basis for the opinion, and the reason for not submitting same at the hearing before the administrative law judge; and 6. Tender of merely cumulative evidence or additional medical examinations does not constitute a valid ground for the admission of additional evidence by the commission. (B) The commission shall consider the motion to submit additional evidence and any answer of opposing parties without oral argument of the parties and enter an order either granting or denying the motion. If the motion is granted, the opposing party(ies) shall be permitted to present rebuttal evidence. As a matter of policy, the commission is opposed to the submission of additional evidence except where it furthers the interests of justice. Therefore, all available evidence shall be introduced at the hearing before the administrative law judge. (3) Applications. (A) An application for review of any final award, order, or decision of the administrative law judge shall state specifically the reason the applicant believes the findings and conclusions of the administrative law judge on the controlling issues are not properly supported. It shall not be sufficient merely to state that the decision of the administrative law judge on any particular issue is not supported by competent and substantial evidence. The allegations of error in an application for review are not an opportunity for early briefing, but rather serve to notify the commission and opposing parties of the nature of the issues that will be addressed on appeal. Accordingly, an application for review should not extend beyond a maximum of five (5) pages. The commission may decline to consider any portion of an application for review that extends beyond this page limitation. (4) Answers. (A) An opposing party (known as the respondent) may file an answer to the petitioner’s application for review, concisely addressing each of the contentions set forth in the application. The answer should not extend beyond a maximum of five (5) pages. The commission may decline to consider any portion of an answer that extends beyond this page limitation. The answer(s) shall be filed within ten (10) days from the date of the commission secretary’s correspondence acknowledging the filing of the application for review. The commission shall have discretion to extend the time for filing an answer. (5) Briefs. (A) If the petitioner desires to file a brief or memorandum of law in support of the application, the petitioner shall so indicate in the application for review. When briefing is requested, the commission secretary will provide, via written correspondence to all parties, a briefing schedule after the transcript is prepared by the division of workers’ compensation. Unless a modified briefing schedule is ordered by the commission, the petitioner’s brief will be due thirty (30) days from the date of the commission secretary’s correspondence establishing the briefing schedule, and respondent briefs or memoranda of law will be due within fifteen (15) days after the date of the commission secretary’s letter acknowledging the commission’s receipt of the petitioner’s brief or memorandum of law. A reply brief is not required or suggested, but if the petitioner believes it is necessary to file a reply, it must be filed within ten (10) days of receipt of the respondent’s brief. The commission shall have discretion, after notice to the parties, to extend or accelerate the briefing schedule. (B) If the petitioner does not include a request for a briefing schedule in the application for review and the respondent desires to file a brief or memorandum of law, that request shall be included in the answer. If the petitioner has requested a briefing schedule, but fails to file a timely brief after that, the respondent may file a brief or memorandum of law within fifteen (15) days from the date the petitioner’s brief was due. (C) Briefs filed in any case pending before the commission shall be typewritten and subject to the following requirements: 1. If submitted physically— A. Be on paper of size eight and onehalf inches by eleven inches (8 1/2" × 11"); and B. Be typed on one (1) side of the paper; and 2. All briefs submitted physically, by facsimile transmission, or by electronic means as set forth on the commission’s website shall— A. Have a left, right, bottom, and top margin of not less than one inch (1"). Page numbers may appear in the bottom margin, but no other text may appear in the margins; B. Have all pages consecutively numbered; C. Use characters throughout the briefs that are not smaller than thirteen (13) font, Times New Roman on Microsoft Word, except footnotes may be as small as ten (10) font; and D. Be double-spaced, except for footnotes, block quotes greater than fifty (50) words, the cover, if any, and certificate of service and signature block. (D) The brief of the petitioner shall not exceed thirty (30) pages. A respondent’s brief shall not exceed twenty-five (25) pages. A reply brief shall not exceed eight (8) pages. A cover sheet or index to any brief need not be counted in the page limitation, but any attachments, exhibits, or appendices to any brief will be considered as pages of the brief and subject to the page limitation for the entire brief. (Parties should note that the commission file contains the award and decision of the administrative law judge along with a complete transcript of the record. It is unnecessary to attach any of these materials to any brief. Any other attachment would not be of record and not subject to consideration, which is limited to the record or transcript of the hearing.) (E) The petitioner’s brief shall contain a fair and concise statement of facts without argument, with citations to the pertinent pages of the transcript supporting each factual assertion. The respondent’s brief may supplement the statement of facts if necessary. No jurisdictional statement is necessary unless jurisdiction is at issue. (Parties are advised that recitations of basic legal principles of workers’ compensation law are not necessary and are discouraged.) The briefs shall identify the issues in dispute and address those issues only, state concisely the factual or legal support for the party’s positions, and contain a conclusion in detail as to the decision, award, or action requested from the commission. Upon its own motion, or upon motion by any interested party, the commission may, in its discretion, decline to consider any brief or any portion of a brief that is not filed in accordance with these rules or where it appears the party has engaged in any dilatory practice or other conduct prejudicial to the efficient and timely adjudication of the appeal. (F) Extraordinary Briefing Requests. 1. Parties requesting an extension of time to file a brief, an extension of page length, or any other extraordinary request pertaining to briefing, may make such request to the commission in writing prior to the last date for filing their brief, such request to include the following: A. The number of additional days, pages, or other specific relief requested; B. A certification that a copy of the request has been served to all opposing parties upon the same date and time, and via the same means, that such request is sent to the commission; C. An indication whether the requesting party has conferred with opposing parties regarding the request, and if not, why not; D. An indication whether opposing parties have registered any objection to the request; and E. The specific facts or circumstances motivating the request. 2. The commission may decline to consider a party’s request for an extension of time to file a brief, an extension of page length, or any other extraordinary request pertaining to briefing where the party’s request fails to comply with the foregoing or where it appears the party has engaged in any dilatory practice, or other conduct prejudicial to the efficient and timely adjudication of the appeal. (6) Oral Argument. Oral argument may be granted by the commission; provided, the request to present oral argument is made in the application for review or in the answer and includes the reason the argument cannot be made adequately by brief. Untimely requests for leave to present oral argument shall not be entertained nor will any request to present oral argument in lieu of a brief be allowed. (7) Hardship Setting. If the claimant for workers’ compensation requests a hardship setting before the commission, an accelerated briefing schedule may be set and oral argument may be denied. The request for a hardship setting shall be made in the application for review, in an answer to the application or in a separate motion to the commission and shall set forth the reason expedited review is necessary. The commission shall have discretion to designate a cause as a hardship case. AUTHORITY: section 286.060, RSMo 2016.* This version of rule filed Dec. 18, 1975, effective Dec. 28, 1975. Amended: Filed Dec. 31, 1975, effective Jan. 10, 1976. Amended: Filed March 16, 1992, effective Sept. 6, 1992. Amended: Filed Nov. 17, 1998, effective April 30, 1999. Amended: Filed Jan. 15, 2003, effective Aug. 30, 2003. Amended: Filed April 11, 2019, effective Oct. 30, 2019. Amended: Filed Feb. 10, 2022, effective Aug. 30, 2022. *Original authority: 286.060, RSMo 1945, amended 1947, 1980, 1995, 2011.