Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Success Stories of Personal Injury Lawyers Directory US Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Canada Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Resource Directory
Search Lawyers by Zip Code
facebook.com/injury.usa

  to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.

Artrip v. Kerns Bakeries Inc.

12/10/1996

's finding that the August 18, 1992 automobile accident caused a significant exacerbation of claimant's compensable July 13, 1992 back injury, it is binding upon this Court.


II.


Code ยง 65.2-309(A) provides that " claim against an employer . . . shall operate as an assignment to the employer of any right to recover damages which the injured employee . . . may have against any other party . . ., and such employer shall be subrogated to any such right . . . ." In applying this statute, we held that "the employee may not pursue his common law remedy in such a manner or settle his claim to the prejudice of the employer's subrogation right and thereafter continue to receive workers' compensation benefits." Wood v. Caudle-Hyatt, Inc., 18 Va. App. 391, 397, 444 S.E.2d 3, 7 (1994). Furthermore, we stated:


"An employee necessarily prejudices his employer's subrogation rights and, thus, is barred from obtaining or continuing to receive benefits under a Workers' Compensation Award when an employee settles a third-party tort claim without notice, or without making a claim for workers' compensation benefits, or without obtaining the consent of the employer." Id. (citing Stone v. George W. Helme Co., 184 Va. 1051, 1060, 37 S.E.2d 70, 75 (1946)).


This rule applies whether the third party tort feasor causes the original compensable injury or a later aggravation of that injury. Barnes v. Wise Fashions, 16 Va. App. 108, 111, 428 S.E.2d 301, 302 (1993).


Claimant admitted that, after receiving compensation payments for nine and one-half weeks out of a possible 500 weeks, he settled the third-party claim related to the injuries he sustained in the automobile accident without employer's knowledge and consent. This evidence supports the commission's finding that claimant's actions clearly prejudiced employer. Accordingly, the commission did not err in terminating claimant's benefits under the Act.


For the reasons stated, we affirm the commission's decision.


Affirmed.






Page 1 2 

Virginia Personal Injury Attorneys    Personal Injury Lawyers


  to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.

Personal Injury Lawyers Brain Injuries Spinal Cord Injuries
Quadriplegia and Paraplegia Back Injuries Ruptured & Herniated Disks
Bulging Disk Neck Injuries Dog Bites
Toxic Mold Product Liability Fire Accidents
Trucking Accidents Boating Accidents Car Accidents
Plane Crashes Medical Malpractice Motorcycle Accidents
Wrongful Death Personal Injury Lawsuits Testimonial
FDP  |   RSS Feeds  |  Articles  |  Jobs  |  Leads  |  Partner Websites
DUI Defense  |  SiteMap  | PI Blog  | Trading Partners | Attorney Registration  | PI Case Laws  | FAQ | Personal Injury Forum
 | Personal Injury Lawyers Directory  | Success Stories  | Press Releases
Copyright © 2005. “National Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (NAPIL)”. All rights reserved.
By using the system, you agree to TERMS OF SERVICE