Nickells v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Decision Date | 12 July 2002 |
Docket Number | No. 23878.,23878. |
Citation | 98 Haw. 508,51 P.3d 375 |
Parties | Mary A. NICKELLS, Claimant-Appellant, v. WAL-MART STORES, INC., Employer-Appellee, and John Mullen & Company, Inc., Insurance Adjuster-Appellee. |
Court | Hawaii Court of Appeals |
Andrew J. Sato, on the briefs, for Claimant-Appellant.
Leighton Oshima, Honolulu, Darlene Y.F. Itomura, Wong, Oshima & Kondo, on the briefs, for Employer Appellee, and Insurance Adjuster-Appellee.
On April 17, 1998, Claimant Appellant Mary A. Nickells (Claimant) filed a claim for workers' compensation benefits arising out of a June 29, 1997 neck injury she sustained while lifting and breaking down boxes at the Kunia Wal Mart store. Employer Appellee Wal Mart Stores, Inc., through its insurance adjuster, John Mullen & Company, Inc. (collectively, Employer), denied liability.
After a June 3, 1999 hearing before the Disability Compensation Division (DCD), the Director of the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations, State of Hawai`i (the Director), issued a July 7, 1999 decision that deemed Claimant's injury compensable, as "an aggravation of her preexisting cervical condition" which stemmed from a 1993 neck injury she sustained while working as a nursing assistant in Virginia. The July 7, 1999 decision concluded:
(Footnote supplied.) The Director denied compensation for Claimant's March 25, 1998 surgery because that surgery was "related to" surgery performed for her 1993 neck injury. The Director denied compensation for Claimant's 1999 surgery because that surgery, in turn, was necessitated by the "failed" March 25, 1998 surgery.
Thereupon, in an October 8, 1999 letter to Claimant's attorney, Employer took the position that "[Claimant] had a temporary aggravation of her pre-existing cervical condition from June 29, 1997 through March 25, 1998, at which time the aggravation resolved and [C]laimant obtained further treatment for her pre-existing cervical condition." On October 20, 1999, Claimant asked the DCD to "schedule a hearing relating to the issue of temporary disability."
Following a May 16, 2000 hearing, the Director issued a June 9, 2000 decision, as follows:
In reaching this conclusion, the Director found that "the 6/29/97 injury temporarily aggravated [C]laimant's preexisting cervical condition[,]" and that "the aggravation of her preexisting condition lasted from 6/29/97 through 3/25/98[.]" The Director limited Claimant's temporary total disability benefits to the only period for which Claimant provided certification of disability, August 16, 1997 through September 9, 1997, less a three-day waiting period.
On June 23, 2000, Claimant filed a notice of appeal to the Labor and Industrial Relations Appeals Board, State of Hawai`i (the Board), from "the Decision of July 7, 1999 and from the Decision of June 9, 2000 entered by [the Director] ..., on the ground that said Decisions are contrary to law and facts."
On September 13, 2000, Employer filed a motion asking the Board to dismiss Claimant's appeal of the Director's July 7, 1999 decision, arguing that Claimant's June 23, 2000 notice of appeal was untimely as to that decision. On October 4, 2000, Claimant filed a responsive memorandum, arguing that Employer's motion to dismiss should be denied, because
At the October 5, 2000 hearing before the Board on Employer's motion to dismiss, Employer's counsel acknowledged that what Employer was seeking was a "partial dismissal[,] of [Claimant's appeal of] that one [July 7, 1999] Decision." Employer's counsel confirmed that Employer was not pursuing "a motion to dismiss the entire appeal[.]" At the hearing, the Board asked Claimant's attorney why the Director's July 7, 1999 decision had not been appealed within twenty days of its transmission, as required by statute. Claimant's counsel blamed a lack of communication amongst himself, Claimant and Claimant's former attorney on the case. Counsel also cited a reluctance "to go up to the [Board] in an interlocutory appeal."
On October 11, 2000, the Board issued its decision and order dismissing Claimant's appeal of the Director's July 7, 1999 decision:
On November 8, 2000, Claimant filed a timely notice of this appeal of the Board's October 11, 2000 decision and order.
Claimant contends on appeal that the Board erred in dismissing her appeal of the Director's July 7, 1999 decision: Opening Brief at 3 (citing "(Rule 28(b)(3) [(sic)]"). We disagree.
Here, we "give effect to the statute's plain and obvious meaning[,]" by giving "the operative words their common meaning," read "in the context of the entire statute and in a manner consistent with its purpose[,]" Alvarez v. Liberty House, Inc., 85 Hawai`i 275, 278, 942 P.2d 539, 542 (1997) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted) (HRS § 398-87(a) on another issue) , and thereupon conclude that Claimant's June 23, 2000 notice of appeal of the Director's July 7, 1999 decision was untimely, and her appeal of that decision therefore barred by HRS § 386-87(a). Kissell v. Labor & Indus. Rel. App. Bd., 57 Haw. 37, 38, 549 P.2d 470, 470 (1976) .
We reject Claimant's argument, that the Director's July 7, 1999 decision issued out of a "bifurcated hearing" and was therefore merely interlocutory to the Director's June 9, 2000 decision, and hence, unappealable except through that later decision. The legislature, in HRS § 386-87(a), deemed any decision of the director "final and conclusive between the parties," and immediately appealable by written notice of appeal timely filed. See also HRS § 386-91(a) (1993) ( ); Yarnell v. City Roofing, Inc., 8 Haw.App. 543, 557, 812 P.2d 1199, 1206 (1991) (...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Dean v. State
... ... See Nickells v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 98 ... Hawai'i 508, 510, 51 P.3d 375, 377 ... ...
-
Konohia v. Commodity Forwarders, Inc.
...is mandatory." That conclusion was right. Kissell, 57 Haw. 37, 549 P.2d 470; see also Nickells v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 98 Hawai'i 508, 51 P.3d 375 (App. 2002). LIRAB found and concluded that the Director's Decision "was sent to the parties on September 3, 2020 and Claimant's appeal was fi......
-
Konohia v. Commodity Forwarders, Inc.
...notice of appeal is mandatory." That conclusion was right. Kissell, 57 Haw. 37, 549 P.2d 470 ; see also Nickells v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 98 Hawai‘i 508, 51 P.3d 375 (App. 2002).LIRAB found and concluded that the Director's Decision "was sent to the parties on September 3, 2020 and Claiman......