Iverson v. Frost Constr
In Iverson v. Frost Constr., 2003 WY 162, 81 P. 3d 190, 195 (Wyo. 2003), the claimant was injured at work on two separate occasions. After the first injury, the claimant did not mention the injury and continued to work his shifts and overtime.
After the second injury, however, the pain was significant enough to cause the claimant to discontinue working, seek medical treatment and obtain a diagnosis.
The Court concluded the weight of the evidence showed that the employee injured himself on the first date, but did not know the nature and extent of his injury until the second date when he notified his employer, discontinued working and sought medical treatment.
The Court said:
"We accept the hearing examiner's conclusion that Iverson suffered a work-related injury in the first incident; however, our law is well established that statutory reporting requirements are not triggered when an employee sustains an apparent trivial injury which does not result in present disability and which would not reasonably be expected to cause future disability. An employee is charged with knowing the full extent and nature of the injury no later than when a correct diagnosis and prognosis of present or likely future disability is communicated to the claimant. At that point, the injury is discovered, it is compensable, and the statute of limitations begins to run."