Gattenby v. Treasurer of Mo.–Custodian of the Second Injury Fund
Decision Date | 28 February 2017 |
Docket Number | WD 80052 |
Parties | Richard GATTENBY, Respondent, v. TREASURER OF THE STATE OF MISSOURI–CUSTODIAN OF THE SECOND INJURY FUND, Appellant. |
Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Eric Lowe, Kansas City, MO, Counsel for Appellant.
Patrick Starke, Blue Springs, MO, Counsel for Respondent.
Before Division Four: Mark D. Pfeiffer, Chief Judge Presiding, Thomas H. Newton, and Lisa White Hardwick, JJ.
Mr. Richard Gattenby is a career plumber who suffered multiple work and non-work related injuries. He has injured his left ankle, both shoulders, and right knee in accidents related to his employment. On appeal, the Second Injury Fund (SIF) questions the validity of the permanent total disability award, asserting that injuries, outside the statute's limitations were considered to determine his disability and that substantial evidence does not exist to uphold the permanent total disability classification. We disagree and affirm.
Mr. Gattenby, a career plumber, suffered a right knee injury in March 2014. This injury was the latest of five prior work and non-work related injuries. In 1977, the first injury resulted in the fusion of the toes on his left foot and the fusion of his left ankle. Mr. Gattenby's gait changed as a consequence of this injury forcing him to walk with a "real bad limp." He was unable to walk naturally, bend his ankle, flex his foot, navigate stairs, rise on his toes, walk backward, or walk easily on uneven ground. Though he did not miss work, he was in constant pain and struggled daily. From this injury, his disability was rated at 60 percent of the 155 week-level or 93 weeks of permanent partial disability.
Mr. Gattenby also suffered two additional work related injuries in 2007 and 2009 resulting in a 17.5 percent disability to each shoulder. In 2010, Mr. Gattenby suffered a non-work related injury requiring several surgeries. He returned to work in 2012 and worked until the March 2014 injury giving rise to the current claim.
As a result of the March 2014 injury, Mr. Gattenby suffers from continued knee pain, limited mobility, and the inability to squat. He can no longer kneel on either knee and has a diminished ability to navigate stairs. He was unable to return to his regular job after this injury and settled his primary claim for this injury with his employer for 15 percent disability of the knee, or 24 weeks of benefits.
In April 2015, the parties appeared for a final hearing before an administrative law judge who determined that SIF is liable to Mr. Gattenby for permanent total disability benefits. At the hearing, Mr. Gattenby testified about his injuries as indicated above. In addition, both orthopedic surgeon Dr. Stuckmeyer and vocational expert Terry Cordray found Mr. Gattenby permanently and totally disabled as a result of the limitations from the primary injury combined with his preexisting limitations. The case was submitted to the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) for review under section 287.480. In August 2016, it upheld the administrative law judge's award, concluding that the SIF is liable for permanent total disability benefits.
This appeal follows.
Section 287.495.11 states that:
We review issues of law de novo and defer to the Commission's finding on issues of fact. Jim Plunkett, Inc. v. Ard , 499 S.W.3d 333, 337 (Mo. App. W.D. 2016). Further, "we will uphold a decision of the Commission if the Commission clearly got the right result, but for the wrong reason." Johnson v. Div. of Emp't Sec., 318 S.W.3d 797, 807 (Mo. App. W.D. 2010).
In the first point SIF argues that the Commission erred in its application subsection 287.220.3 to the facts of this case. Initially, however, we must address whether subsection 287.220.3 or subsection 287.220.2 is the applicable SIF liability statute here2 ; the parties agree that the requirements for SIF liability under subsection 287.220.3 are stricter than the requirements of subsection 287.220.2. Further, at oral argument, SIF conceded that if subsection 287.220.2 is applicable, the Commission's permanent total disability award is supported by substantial evidence (which would dispose of SIF's sufficiency of the evidence challenge in the second point).
At issue is the meaning of the 2013 legislative changes to section 287.220. Subsection 287.220.2 and 287.220.3, respectively, state in pertinent part as follows:
Allcorn v. Tap Enters, Inc. , 277 S.W.3d 823, 828 (Mo. App. S.D. 2009) (citations omitted). Therefore, in granting an award, the Commission must interpret the relevant statute by its clear, plain, and obvious terms.
All claims against SIF require two distinct classes or categories of "injuries":
(1) at least one preexisting injury; and, (2) a subsequent compensable injury (often referred to as the "primary" injury). See Treasurer of Mo.–Custodian of the Second Injury Fund v. Witte , 414 S.W.3d 455, 462 n.4 (Mo. banc 2013). And, of course, the legislature was presumed to know the law when enacting the relevant SIF legislation in 2013. See Greenbriar Hills Country Club v. Dir. of Revenue , 47 S.W.3d 346, 352 (Mo. banc 2001).
Notably, with respect to claims involving occupational diseases, the legislature specifically used the phrase "subsequent compensable injury" to describe when the 2013 modification to the law applies to the employee's claim.3 But with respect to claims for...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Treasurer of Mo. v. Parker
...Court handed down its decision in Cosby. The Commission's Award applied the analysis of Gattenby v. Treasurer of Missouri-Custodian of the Second Injury Fund, 516 S.W.3d 859 (Mo. App. W.D. 2017), which was overturned by Cosby. 6. "An injury by accident is compensable only if the accident wa......
-
Dubuc v. Treasurer of the State Custodian of the Second Injury Fund
...abrogated this Court's ruling in Gattenby v. Treasurer of State-Custodian of Second Injury Fund, 516 S.W.3d 859 (Mo. App. W.D. 2017). In Gattenby, decided before Mr. Dubuc's hearing, concluded that section 287.220.3 applies only when all injuries occurred after January 1, 2014. The Missouri......
-
Cosby v. Treasurer of State
...previous disability prior to January 1, 2014, to PPD benefits.5 Mr. Cosby relies on Gattenby v. Treasurer of Missouri–Custodian of the Second Injury Fund , 516 S.W.3d 859, 862 (Mo. App. 2017), for the proposition that section 287.220.3 "applies only where both the preexisting and primary in......
-
Clinkenbeard v. Mo. Dep't of Corr.
...asserts that he reasonably relied on the "old" law, as set forth in Gattenby v. Treasurer of the State of Missouri – Custodian of the Second Injury Fund , 516 S.W.3d 859 (Mo. App. W.D. 2017) (abrogated by Cosby , 579 S.W.3d at 207 ), "for the proposition that [SIF] liability would be analyz......