 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
City of Poulan9/16/2002
We granted cert. in this workers compensation case to determine whether the Court of Appeals properly found that the failure to have a "maximum medical improvement" (or "MMI") determination tolled the statute of limitation for filing a change of condition claim under workers' compensation. City of Poulan v. Hodge, 251 Ga. App. 500 ( SE2d ) (2001) (Andrews, P.J., concurring in judgment only). This case involves application of the version of OCGA § 34-9-104 (b) in effect before 1990 in those factual situations where a health care provider failed to indicate on a workers' compensation form whether or not an injured worker had attained his or her "maximum medical improvement."
Prior to 1990, the two-year statute of limitation in OCGA § 34-9- 104 (b) for filing a change of condition claim began to run only upon "the final payment of income benefits due under this chapter." This phrase was interpreted by the Court of Appeals in MARTA v. Ledbetter, 184 Ga. App. 518 (361 SE2d 878) (1987), which held that in determining what benefits may be "due" a claimant, " hat is meant ... is not that the type of disability may arise in the future, but rather that there is evidence that it existed at the time although no claim was made for it." Id. at 519. The dissent in Ledbetter charged that this interpretation "emasculate " the limitations period, in that "a worker could wait 10 or 20 or 30 or even 50 years before filing a change in condition claim." Id. at 520 (Deen, P.J., dissenting, joined by Carley and Sognier, JJ.) This Court denied cert. in Ledbetter. 184 Ga. App. 910.
The work-related injury in issue in this case was incurred in 1989 and thus comes under the pre-1990 version of OCGA § 34-9-104 (b). After Hodge injured his back while working for the City of Poulan, he was treated and released for full duty work. Although his physician reported that Hodge had no permanent disability as a result of the injury, the health care provider failed to enter a finding under the "maximum medical improvement" portion of the form. Hodge later left the City's employ and in 1999 sought compensation benefits based on change of condition and permanent partial disability. Hodge claimed that the statute of limitation did not preclude his claim because he was "due" these benefits, in that he had not reached maximum medical improvement prior to the time his benefits for the 1989 injury were terminated. Although the ALJ and State Board of Workers' Compensation denied Hodge's claim, the superior court reversed holding that under Ledbetter he was entitled to recover as a matter of law.
Hodge relied upon the fact that no "maximum medical improvement" finding had been entered in his case. The Court of Appeals in State of Ga. v. Birditt, 181 Ga. App. 356, 357-358 (352 SE2d 203) (1986) recognized that legal determination of the permanent partial disability benefits to which a worker was entitled might not be calculable until the injured worker reached maximum medical improvement, since the degree if any of the permanency of the injury might not be ascertainable before that point. Looking to this holding in Birditt, the Court of Appeals in this case stated that a finding of maximum medical improvement was a "legal condition precedent to a determination of disability." City of Poulan, supra, 251 Ga. App. at 503 (1). Birditt, however, does not support this language since Birditt merely upheld the appropriateness of the Board's finding that a claimant who had not reached maximum medical improvement had failed to establish that his injuries were permanent in quality so as to qualify for permanent partial disability. Nothing in the Workers' Compensation Act supports the "legal condition precedent" conclusion reached by the Cour
Page 1 2 3 Georgia Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|