 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Otteson v. Montana State Fund8/16/2005
Submitted on Briefs: December 8, 2004
Doug Otteson (Otteson) was injured in 1994 while working for a coal company in Big Horn County. Montana State Fund (State Fund) accepted liability for payment of workers' compensation benefits and has paid Otteson permanent total disability (PTD) benefits. On December 23, 2003, the State Fund paid Otteson an impairment award pursuant to Rausch v. State Compensation Ins. Fund, 2002 MT 203, 311 Mont. 210, 54 P.3d 25. On December 30, 2003, Otteson requested that the State Fund convert his PTD benefits to permanent partial disability (PPD) benefits upon his 65 birthday. The State Fund refused Otteson's request. Otteson then filed a petition with the Workers' Compensation Court (WCC) seeking conversion of his PTD benefits to PPD benefits. The WCC granted summary judgment to the State Fund dismissing Otteson's petition with prejudice. Otteson appeals.
We restate the issues before us as follows:
1. Did the WCC err in refusing to convert Otteson's PTD benefits to PPD benefits upon his reaching age 65?
2. Did the WCC err in denying Otteson a 20% penalty along with his costs and fees?
Otteson has made no constitutional challenge to the statutes underlying the judgment of the WCC. We affirm the WCC.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
In January 1994 Otteson was injured while working for Decker Coal Company. The State Fund accepted liability for his workers' compensation claim and began paying Otteson PTD benefits.
In December 2003 Otteson, approaching his 65 birthday, petitioned the State Fund requesting a conversion of his PTD benefits to PPD benefits. Otteson based his request on our decisions in Hunter v. Gibson Products of Billings Heights, Inc. (1986), 224 Mont. 481, 730 P.2d 1139, and Russette v. Chippewa Cree Housing Auth. (1994), 265 Mont. 90, 874 P.2d 1217. The State Fund denied his petition. In December 2003, the State Fund paid Otteson an impairment award pursuant to Rausch, 2002 MT 203, 311 Mont. 210, 54 P.3d 25. In March 2004 Otteson petitioned the WCC challenging the State Fund's refusal to convert his PTD benefits to PPD benefits, and also prayed for a 20% penalty against the State Fund for an unreasonable refusal of benefits, along with his attorney fees and costs. The WCC granted summary judgment to the State Fund and dismissed Otteson's petition with prejudice, concluding that Otteson was not entitled to PPD benefits and that the State Fund acted reasonably in denying such benefits. Otteson appeals.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
Our review of a grant or denial of summary judgment by the WCC is the same as the standard used in ruling upon a motion for summary judgment; we determine whether there is an absence of genuine issues of material fact and whether the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Grenz v. Fire & Cas. of Connecticut, 2001 MT 8, 10, 304 Mont. 83, 10, 18 P.3d 994, 10. Our review of the WCC's conclusions of law is plenary; we determine whether its legal conclusions are correct. Grenz, 10.
DISCUSSION
ISSUE 1
Did the WCC err when it refused to convert Otteson's PTD benefits to PPD benefits upon his reaching age 65?
Otteson argues that he is entitled to a conversion of his PTD benefits to PPD benefits in addition to his impairment award.
The State Fund denied Otteson's claimed entitlement to PPD benefits concluding that subsequent to this Court's decision in Hunter, 224 Mont. 481, 730 P.2d 1139,the legislature amended the Workers' Compensation Act (WCA) to preclude the conversion of PTD benefits to PPD benefits u
Page 1 2 3 Montana Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|