 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Young v. Virginia Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Program10/4/2005
William T. Young, Jr. (Tommy) and his mother, Ada F. Young, appeal a decision of the Virginia Workers' Compensation Commission (commission) denying Ms. Young's request on Tommy's behalf for certain housing benefits under the Virginia Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Act (Act), Code §§ 38.2-5000 to 38.2-5021. Specifically, Ms. Young contends the commission erred in determining she was not entitled to housing benefits that were in effect when she filed her claim for compensation for Tommy's birth-related neurological injury and when that claim was first adjudicated by the commission. For the reasons that follow, we affirm the commission's decision.
I. BACKGROUND
The facts relevant to this appeal are not in dispute. Ms. Young gave birth to Tommy on March 30, 1989. On September 14, 1998, Ms. Young filed a claim with the commission, pursuant to Code § 38.2-5004, seeking admission into the Virginia Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Program (Program) in order to obtain compensation for Tommy's birth-related neurological injury.
On January 8, 1999, the deputy commissioner denied the claim. On March 10, 2000, the full commission reversed the deputy commissioner's decision and awarded Tommy "all the benefits provided by Code § 38.2-5009." On February 13, 2001, this Court affirmed the full commission's decision.
In early 2003, Ms. Young, who lived with Tommy in rental property, requested cash-grant housing benefits from the Program. Ms. Young had made no prior requests for housing benefits from the Program. By letters dated April 14, 2003, and June 3, 2003, the Program informed Ms. Young that Tommy was not eligible for the requested housing benefits because, in response to an actuarial study of the Program, the Program's Board of Directors (Board) had "terminated all housing benefits for awards after January 1, 2000," and Tommy was not admitted into the Program until March 20, 2000, at the earliest. The Program also informed Ms. Young that, although the Board had passed a new housing-benefits policy on September 19, 2000, providing "one-time funds for medically necessary modifications or construction of an accessible bedroom and bathroom," those benefits were available only to families that owned their own homes. The Program further noted that, although it anticipated being able to eventually offer "appropriate housing benefits" to families that rented their homes, such benefits were still under development and not yet available.
Ms. Young appealed the Program's denial of her request for housing benefits to the commission. The deputy commissioner conducted an evidentiary hearing on October 9, 2003.
At that hearing, Ms. Young argued that Tommy was entitled to the housing benefits that were in effect when she first applied for Tommy's admission into the Program on September 14, 1998, or the housing benefits that were in effect when that claim was first adjudicated by the deputy commissioner on January 8, 1999. Ms. Young testified that she and Tommy had lived in the same rental house since April 1999, and she needed housing benefits in order to provide Tommy with a suitable home that would accommodate his needs. Unlike their current home, she explained, a suitable home would have hallways and doorways that were wide enough to accommodate the new power wheelchair the Program was providing, an accessible kitchen that would allow Tommy to roll himself up to the kitchen table, a screen porch that would permit Tommy to enjoy fresh air without exposure to insects, and a bathroom that was large enough to accommodate an accessible toilet, a lift, and a roll-in shower.
According to Ms. Young, it took two people
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Virginia Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|