 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Smith v. State Compensation Fund2/17/2000
Submitted: February 10, 2000
The claimant herein seeks interim benefits under section 39-71-610, MCA (1997), while he pursues his workers' compensation claim. His request for 610 benefits was initially made to the Department of Labor and Industry (Department), which denied the request. He appealed that decision to this Court on February 7, 2000. A telephone conference call was held February 9, 2000, to discuss the appeal. Mr. William Dean Blackaby represented claimant and Mr. David A. Hawkins represented the insurer, State Compensation Insurance Fund, in the conference. The claims adjuster, Gina Keltz, also participated.
The parties agreed to proceed informally, by way of the telephone conference, on the merits of the request. A wide ranging, forty-five minute discussion was then held with counsel and Ms. Keltz. At the end of the conference, the Court requested counsel to forward an affidavit which had been prepared by claimant and a history of workers' compensation claims filed by claimant. The parties agreed to do so and the Court received the materials the next day.
Based on the representations of counsel and the documentation furnished the Court, I glean the following facts:
Claimant suffered a work-related back injury in approximately 1989.
On May 1, 1998, claimant was involved in another work-related accident, the exact nature of which is unclear to the Court. However, the incident was sufficiently significant to cause his employer to call a safety meeting to discuss the incident.
According to claimant:
At the time of the incident, I experienced temporary symptoms such as numbness, but because I had injured my back in the past, I felt that these symptoms might be temporary in nature.
(AFFIDAVIT OF KEVIN E. SMITH 4.)
Claimant did not seek treatment for his back until June of 1999, at which time he reported back problems. He was put on light duty by his physician.
In early July 1999, the claimant filed a claim reporting that he had been injured at work sometime in the spring or summer of 1999.
Claimant asserts he did not learn of the relationship of his back problems to the
May 1, 1999 accident until his doctor appointments in late June and early July 1999.
On July 15, 1999, the State Fund commenced paying temporary total disability benefits pursuant to section 39-71-608, MCA, under a reservation of rights pending further investigation.
In August 1999, the State Fund notified claimant it was terminating benefits because it had determined after further investigation that his claim is barred by the statute of limitations set out in section 39-71-601, MCA. The State Fund also questioned whether the claimant's back problems were related to the May 1, 1998 incident.
The claimant requested mediation and a mediation conference was held on September 10, 1999. At that time, the State Fund agreed to reinstate his benefits under the reservation of rights pending further investigation.
In December of 1999, the State Fund again sent notice of termination of benefits, denying the claim based on the statute of limitations and a lack of proof of a relationship between claimant's 1998 accident and his back problems. Benefits were terminated effective December 27, 1999, and have not been reinstated.
Claimant, through his attorney, then requested the State Fund to agree to extend the filing period pursuant to section 39-71-601(2), MCA. On January 13, 2000, the request was denied.
On January 19, 2000, the claimant requested the Department to orde
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Montana Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|