Com., Cent. State Hosp. v. Gray
| Decision Date | 23 June 1994 |
| Docket Number | No. 94-SC-64-WC,94-SC-64-WC |
| Citation | 880 S.W.2d 557 |
| Parties | COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky, CENTRAL STATE HOSPITAL, Appellant, v. Craig GRAY; Vicki G. Newberg, Acting Director of Special Fund; and Workers' Compensation Board, Appellees. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky |
James Gordon Fogle, William A. Miller, Sr., and John G. Grohmann, Ferreri & Fogle, Louisville, for appellant.
Edwards A. Mayer, Louisville, for appellee Gray.
Mark C. Webster and Joel D. Zakem, Labor Cabinet, Special Fund, Louisville, for appellee Newberg.
Claimant, a licensed practical nurse, injured his back at work on October 1, 1989, when he was shoved by an unruly psychiatric patient and struck his low back against a stair railing. Later that day, while assisting in lifting the same patient, he again was shoved to the floor. His injuries required back surgery, and it was determined that he was temporarily totally disabled for various periods up until October 24, 1990, at which time he reached maximum medical improvement. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) awarded claimant a 50% permanent, partial occupational disability and apportioned half of the award to the employer and half to the Special Fund. It was determined that claimant's permanent disability was, in part, caused by the arousal of preexisting dormant degenerative conditions. Therefore, the award was apportioned pursuant to KRS 342.1202. The employer was held liable for all temporary total disability (TTD) benefits.
This case concerns whether KRS 342.1202, from its enactment in 1987 until it was amended in 1990 specifically to provide otherwise, required that awards of TTD benefits in claims involving preexisting back or heart conditions be apportioned equally between the employer and the Special Fund.
Until KRS 342.1202 was enacted in 1987, KRS 342.120 controlled the apportionment of all workers' compensation awards. Although the statute holds the Special Fund liable for any "additional permanent disability" caused where the work-related injury is superimposed on a preexisting or previously dormant condition, it is silent regarding the apportionment of temporary disability. In an opinion which recognized the specific language of KRS 342.120 as well as the fact that a worker's TTD is caused primarily by the work-related injury, this Court interpreted KRS 342.120 as requiring the employer to pay all TTD benefits, even where the entire permanent disability award was the responsibility of the Special Fund. Proven Products Sales & Service v. Crutcher, Ky., 464 S.W.2d 800 (1971). The Court noted that the Special Fund was responsible for benefits only where explicitly stated, and KRS 342.120(3) held the Special Fund liable only for permanent disability benefits which resulted, in part, from a preexisting or previously dormant condition. Id. at 802. Therefore, the Special Fund was not liable for TTD benefits.
KRS 342.1202, as enacted in 1987, provided as follows:
An award for income benefits for total or partial disability under this chapter based, whole or in part, on a pre-existing disease or pre-existing condition of the back or of the heart shall be apportioned, by the administrative law judge, fifty percent (50%) to the employer and fifty percent (50%) to the special fund. Apportionment required by this section shall not be a cause of appeal.
Like KRS 342.120, which controlled the apportionment of all workers' compensation awards before the effective date of KRS 342.1202 and which continues to control the apportionment of all awards other than those for conditions of the back and heart, the 1987 version of KRS 342.1202 did not explicitly address the apportionment of temporary disability awards. However, unlike KRS 342.120, the 1987 version of KRS 342.1202 did not explicitly state that the Special Fund was liable for permanent disability. It referred only to total or partial disability. Although the apportionment scheme of KRS 342.1202 was not explicitly limited to permanent disability until the effective date of the 1990 amendment, at which time the word "permanent" was inserted before the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rehm v. Navistar International, No. 2002-CA-001399-MR (KY 2/25/2005)
...second is a matter of destroying valuable common-law rights that have existed for centuries"). 19. Commonwealth, Central State Hospital v. Gray, 880 S.W.2d 557, 559 (Ky. 1994) (stating that "[i]n construing statutory provisions, it is presumed that the legislature did not intend an absurd ...
-
Cosby v. Com.
...statutory provisions, it is presumed that the legislature did not intend an absurd result." Commonwealth, Central State Hosp. v. Gray, Ky., 880 S.W.2d 557, 559 (1994). The legislature's intention "shall be effectuated, even at the expense of the letter of the law." Commonwealth v. Rosenfiel......
-
Workforce Development Cabinet v. Gaines
...construes statutory provisions, it must presume "that the legislature did not intend an absurd result." Commonwealth, Cent. State Hosp. v. Gray, 880 S.W.2d 557 (Ky.1994); see also Renaker v. Commonwealth, 889 S.W.2d 819, 820 (Ky.App.1994), Williams v. Commonwealth, 829 S.W.2d 942, 944 (Ky.A......
-
Revenue Cabinet v. O'Daniel
...statutory provisions, it is presumed that the legislature did not intend an absurd result."); Commonwealth, Central State Hosp. v. Gray, 880 S.W.2d 557, 559 (Ky.1994) (The legislature's intention "shall be effectuated, even at the expense of the letter of the law."); and Commonwealth v. Ros......