Caballero v. Tyson Fresh Meats
October 24, 2025
Credible, evidence-based testimony shapes Iowa causation rulings.
On May 16, 2025, the Iowa Workers’ Compensation Commission issued a decision in Caballero v. Tyson Fresh Meats, File No 23005158.01. Deputy Erin Q. Pals ruled in favor of the defendant, who was represented by Jason Wiltfang of Corridorlaw Group Iowa, P.C.
In her decision, Deputy Pals found that the claimant failed to prove that he sustained an injury which arose out of and in the course of his employment. This finding was shaped in large part by the disparity between the parties’ IMEs. The claimant’s expert’s opinions made broad “blanket statements” regarding causation that cited neither the medical record nor the AMA Guides, the Deputy found. The defense’s expert, on the other hand, related all of his opinions to the medical record and cited the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Disease and Injury Causation
to further support his findings.
The approach employed by the claimant’s expert, Farid Manshadi, MD, failed to persuade the Deputy that the claimant’s employment caused his injury. Deputy Pals noted the paucity of claimant’s argument on several occasions, observing that claimant’s expert provided no rationale for his opinions despite being the only physician to relate the claimant’s injuries to his activities at Tyson.
When describing the importance of expert evidence to establishing causation, Deputy Pals noted that “[t]he weight to be given to an expert opinion is determined by the finder of fact and may be affected by the accuracy of the facts the expert relied upon as well as other surrounding circumstances.” Applying that standard to the facts of this case, Deputy Pals found “the blanket, cursory causation opinions of Dr. Manshadi” to be less persuasive than those of the defendant’s experts. This is a lesson that both claimants and defendants would do well to remember. The decision in Caballero is proof that an expert opinion, including the methodology applied and reasoning provided by the expert, has the potential to make or break a case.
New Paragraph
On August 27, 2025, the Iowa Workers’ Compensation Commission issued a decision in Irvin v. Tyson Fresh Meats. Deputy Amanda R. Rutherford ruled in favor of the defendant, who was represented by Jason Wiltfang of Corridorlaw Group Iowa, P.C. In her decision, Deputy Rutherford found that the evidence in the record was insufficient to establish that the claimant’s duties resulted in a cumulative injury. While explaining the rationale behind her decision, the Deputy paid particular attention to the vague job description that Irvin provided to her medical expert. In the letter sent to her expert requesting an opinion and providing background information, Irvin included an excerpt from her Answers to Defendant’s Interrogatories that stated that, at work, “she made 500 to 1,000 boxes daily, as well as stacked boxes, moved boxes, and put them on the line, down chutes or on top units” and that “the job required repetitive lifting, bending, and twisting.” Irvin , File No. 23009752.01 (Arb. 1/31/2025) at 15. However, Irvin did not “provide pertinent details such as weighs, sizes, amount of force needed, and/or explain body mechanics that could have caused her alleged injuries.” Id . Deputy Rutherford stated that, because of this omission, the claimant’s expert was “not given an accurate, detailed and/or complete job description before authorizing his report.” Id . The fact that the claimant’s expert based his examination on an incomplete job description ultimately proved fatal to Irvin’s case. As the Deputy noted in her decision, “[i]n a cumulative injury claim, a medically supported diagnosis, detailed and complete job description, and clearly articulated mechanism of injury are essential evidence.” Id. Without that evidence, it is very difficult for claimants to meet their burdens of proof. The decision in Irvin goes to show that, when it comes to cumulative injury cases, experts should be provided with complete job descriptions—otherwise, the flawed foundation of the expert’s opinion can render it unpersuasive.
Legal Update: Recent Iowa Supreme Court Ruling Alters Worker’s Compensation Landscape
In Cosgrove v. CRST Dedicated Services (File No. 506807 [...]
The post John Cosgrove v. CRST Dedicated Services appeared first on Scheldrup Wiltfang Corridorlaw Group Iowa, P.C..
Scheldrup Wiltfang attorney Jason Wiltfang presented o [...]
The post Naima Cerwick v. Tyson Fresh Meats, Inc. appeared first on Scheldrup Wiltfang Corridorlaw Group Iowa, P.C..
File No. 5044228 (App. Dec. 02/14/19) This case involv [...]
The post James Hessenius vs. Great Plains Orthotics & Prosthetics, Inc., and United First & Casualty Co. appeared first on Scheldrup Wiltfang Corridorlaw Group Iowa, P.C..
