Bitnoff v. Southwest Rendering, 48833
| Decision Date | 21 January 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 48833,48833 |
| Parties | Alden BITNOFF, Appellant, v. SOUTHWEST RENDERING and Hawkeye-Security Insurance Company, Appellees. |
| Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
The record in a workmen's compensation case is examined and, under the circumstances and facts set forth in the opinion, it is held the trial court did not err (1) in finding claimant's motion to set aside a settlement agreement, final receipt and release of liability was barred by the provisions of K.S.A. 44-527, and (2) in entering judgment for the respondent and insurance carrier.
Robert L. Bates, Great Bend, argued the cause and was on the brief for appellant.
Thomas L. Toepfer, Hays, argued the cause and Tom Kelley, Hays, was with him on the brief for appellees.
This is an appeal under the Workmen's Compensation Act from an order of the district court refusing to set aside a settlement agreement, final receipt and release of liability.
On August 27, 1974, appellant Bitnoff suffered an accidental injury within the terms of the Act. A settlement was effected and a Form D settlement agreement, final receipt and release of liability was executed by appellant and filed with the director November 5, 1974. Over sixteen months later, in March, 1976, appellant filed an application for compensation and a motion to set aside the prior agreement, receipt and release. The examiner found that under K.S.A. 44-527 the motion and application were filed out of time. The director reversed the examiner and directed the examiner to conduct a full hearing and take evidence. On appeal the district court reversed the director and reinstated the examiner's finding that the motion and application were filed out of time.
Bitnoff appeals to this court and alleges that due to certain actions of the employer and the insurance company, they should be estopped from asserting the provisions of K.S.A. 44-527 and his claim should be heard on the merits. The matter comes to this court upon an agreed statement of facts and record. There are no allegations of fraud or misrepresentation in the record and none were claimed in the original motion, which, omitting formal parts, is as follows:
"Comes now the claimant and moves the Director to set aside the Form D Release taken and entered in this matter based upon his injury August 27, 1974, for the reason that additional medical treatments were necessary and a permanent disability resulted from the accident."
K.S.A. 44-527 provides:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Yocum v. Phillips Petroleum Co.
...the workmen's compensation act provides the only remedy for injuries which are encompassed within its scope. Bitnoff v. Southwest Rendering, 223 Kan. 334, 336, 573 P.2d 1033 (1978); Stonecipher v. Winn-Rau Corporation, 218 Kan. 617, Syl. PP 1, 2, 545 P.2d 317 (1976); Fritzson v. City of Man......
-
Hormann v. New Hampshire Ins. Co.
...the workers' compensation act provides the only remedy for injuries which are encompassed within its scope. Bitnoff v. Southwest Rendering, 223 Kan. 334, 336, 573 P.2d 1033 (1978); Shade v. Cement Co., 92 Kan. 146, 148, 139 P. 1193, aff'd 93 Kan. 257 (1914). The logical extension of this ru......
-
Barncord v. State, Dept. of Transp.
...and exclusive, and that we must look to the procedure of the act for methods of its administration. E. g., Bitnoff v. Southwest Rendering, 223 Kan. 334, 336, 573 P.2d 1033 (1978). K.S.A. 44-521 sets out the pertinent statutory authority regarding settlement "Compensation due under this act ......
-
Peterson v. Garvey Elevators, Inc.
...clear that the instant proceedings were initiated outside the one year limitation provided by that statute. Bittnoff v. Southwest Rendering, 223 Kan. 334, 573 P.2d 1033 (1978)." At Peterson's request, judicial review followed, and the trial court affirmed the ALJ and the director. This appe......
-
CHAPTER 6
...that the workers’ compensation act provides the only remedy for injuries which are encompassed within its scope. Bitnoff v. Sw. Rendering, 223 Kan. 334, 336, 573 P.2d 1033 (1978); Shade v. Ash Grove Lime & Portland Cement Co., 92 Kan. 146, 148, 139 Pac. 1193, aff’d 93 Kan. 257 (1914). The l......