Christensen v. Industrial Commission

Decision Date03 March 1982
Docket NumberNo. 17426,17426
Citation642 P.2d 755
PartiesMel CHRISTENSEN and State Insurance Fund, Plaintiffs, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION of Utah and Scott Morrison, Defendants.
CourtUtah Supreme Court

M. David Eckersley, Salt Lake City, for plaintiffs.

David L. Wilkinson, Atty. Gen., Frank V. Nelson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Salt Lake City, for defendants.

Robert C. Fillerup, Orem, for Scott Morrison.

OAKS, Justice:

This is a petition for review of an order of the Industrial Commission awarding an employee medical expenses attributed to an injury incurred four years earlier. The question is whether the employee's claim is barred on the basis that the statute of limitations in the workmen's compensation act applies to medical benefits as well as disability compensation. We find the limitation inapplicable and affirm the award.

On April 9, 1976, Scott Morrison strained his back while shoveling cement as an employee of Mel Christensen. As a result of this injury, Morrison was off work from April 12, 1976, to May 9, 1976. After an examination on October 29, 1976, Morrison's doctor released him from care with no permanent or partial disability. The State Insurance Fund, workmen's compensation insurer for Mel Christensen, paid Morrison temporary total disability compensation for the period from April 12 to May 9, 1976. It also paid all medical expenses he incurred through January 20, 1977. Morrison received no further medical treatment for his injuries until November, 1979. On December 5, 1979, he underwent surgery for a herniated disc.

The State Insurance Fund denied Morrison's claims for medical expenses and weekly compensation on the basis that their filing date, March 21, 1980, was more than three years after his last payment of compensation for lost wages. The Commission sustained that denial as to the weekly compensation, and no review was sought. However, the Commission awarded payment of the medical expenses arising out of the original accident, including the surgery performed in December of 1979, and plaintiffs, the employer and the State Insurance Fund, seek review in this Court.

Plaintiffs contend that Morrison's claim is barred by the three-year statute of limitations; defendants respond that this limitation does not apply to claims for medical expenses. U.C.A., 1953, § 35-1-99 provides in pertinent part:

If no claim for compensation is filed with the industrial commission within three years from the date of the accident or the date of the last payment of compensation, the right to compensation shall be wholly barred.

The question presented by this case is whether the term "compensation" in the foregoing statute includes payments for medical expenses. If it does, Morrison's claim is barred by the three-year limitations period, since he admittedly did not file his latest claim for medical expenses within three years from the date on which he received his most recent payment from the State Insurance Fund. If "compensation" does not include payments for medical expenses, the limitations period is inapplicable and Morrison is entitled to all medical expenses incurred as a result of his industrial accident.

In support of their contention that the term "compensation" as used in section 35-1-99 includes payments for medical expenses, plaintiffs rely on section 35-1-44(6), which states, "The following terms as used in this title shall be construed as follows: * * * (6) 'Compensation' shall mean the payments and benefits provided for in this title." They also argue that a holding in their favor would be harmonious with related, though not controlling, decisions of this Court. 1

Defendants rely on Kennecott Copper Corp. v. Industrial Commission and Bilanzich, Utah, 597 P.2d 875 (1979) (Bilanzich ), in which this Court held that the payment of medical expenses was not "payment of compensation" under section 35-1-99 and therefore did not start the running of a new three-year statutory period to allow the payment of additional lost wages. In the course of reasoning that this construction was necessary to prevent subverting the three-year limitation on payment of wages, this Court, in a unanimous opinion, explained:

The reasons for making this distinction between compensation to be paid for loss of wages because of injury and disability, as contrasted to the payment for medical expenses in connection therewith, is that the law is firmly established that, once it is determined that there was an industrial accident, there is no limitation as to the time during which the medicals must...

To continue reading

Request your trial
20 cases
  • Reeves v. Gentile
    • United States
    • Utah Supreme Court
    • May 17, 1991
    ...Morris, 610 P.2d 1285, 1286 (Utah 1980).3 See, e.g., American Coal Co. v. Sandstrom, 689 P.2d 1, 3 (Utah 1984); Christensen v. Industrial Comm'n, 642 P.2d 755, 756 (Utah 1982).4 See, e.g., Quatrano v. Marrocco, 61 Ill.App.2d 1, 208 N.E.2d 632, 638 (1965); Abram v. Bourrie, 8 Mich.App. 184, ......
  • Utah Dept. of Administrative Services v. Public Service Com'n
    • United States
    • Utah Supreme Court
    • January 6, 1983
    ...retain continuing regulatory jurisdiction despite having resolved some connected issues with finality. E.g., Christensen v. Industrial Commission, Utah, 642 P.2d 755 (1982); Salt Lake City v. Industrial Commission, 61 Utah 514, 215 P. 1047 (1923) (industrial injuries).32 Utah State Board of......
  • Bylsma v. Willey
    • United States
    • Utah Supreme Court
    • December 1, 2017
    ...products liability doctrine should continue to exist as we have articulated it in caselaw—is still relevant. See Christensen v. Indus. Comm'n , 642 P.2d 755, 756 (Utah 1982) ("A well-established canon of statutory construction provides that where a legislature amends a portion of a statute ......
  • Rutherford v. Talisker Canyons Fin., Co.
    • United States
    • Utah Supreme Court
    • June 27, 2019
    ...of the unchanged portions of the statute and to have adopted them as consistent with its own intent." Christensen v. Indus. Comm’n , 642 P.2d 755, 756 (Utah 1982) ; see also SCALIA & GARNER, READING LAW at 322 (noting that when a phrase has been "authoritatively interpreted" by a jurisdicti......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Finding Utah Legislative Intent
    • United States
    • Utah State Bar Utah Bar Journal No. 8-2, February 1995
    • Invalid date
    ...the bill was passed. --------- Notes: [1]See American Coal Co. v. Sandstrom, 689 P.2d 1, 3 (Utah 1984); Christensen v. Industrial Comm'n, 642 P.2d 755, 756 (Utah 1982); Millett v. Clark Clinic Corp., 609 P.2d 934, 936 (Utah 1980); Johnson v. State Tax Comm'n, 17 Utah 2d 337, 339, 411 P.2d 8......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT