Matter of Goutremout v. Advance Auto Parts ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                           State of New York
    Supreme Court, Appellate Division
    Third Judicial Department
    Decided and Entered: December 3, 2015                   519727
    ________________________________
    In the Matter of the Claim of
    BONNIE GOUTREMOUT,
    Respondent,
    v
    ADVANCE AUTO PARTS et al.,
    Appellants,
    and                                   MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
    SPECIAL FUND FOR REOPENED
    CASES,
    Respondent.
    WORKERS' COMPENSATION BOARD,
    Respondent.
    ________________________________
    Calendar Date:   October 19, 2015
    Before:   McCarthy, J.P., Rose, Devine and Clark, JJ.
    __________
    Wolff, Goodrich & Goldman, LLP, Syracuse (Robert E. Geyer
    Jr. of counsel), for appellants.
    Steven M. Licht, Special Funds Conservation Committee,
    Albany (Jill Singer of counsel), for Special Fund for Reopened
    Cases, respondent.
    Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York City
    (Steven Segall of counsel), for Workers Compensation Board,
    respondent.
    __________
    -2-                519727
    Devine, J.
    Appeals (1) from a decision of the Workers' Compensation
    Board, filed December 10, 2013, which ruled that liability for
    the claim did not shift to the Special Fund for Reopened Cases
    pursuant to Workers' Compensation Law § 25-a, and (2) from a
    decision of said Board, filed November 10, 2014, which denied a
    request by the employer and its workers' compensation carrier for
    reconsideration and/or full Board review.
    In December 2001, claimant sustained a work-related injury
    to her right knee. In August 2005, claimant was awarded a 25%
    schedule loss of use of her right leg, which was paid by the
    workers' compensation carrier at that time, and the case was
    closed. In November 2008, the claim was amended to include a
    consequential left knee injury. Thereafter, in February 2009,
    claimant filed a request for further action seeking authorization
    for right knee replacement surgery, which was granted. In March
    2011, claimant was awarded an overall 50% loss of use of her
    right leg, which was then paid by the employer's workers'
    compensation carrier. At a hearing in September 2012, the
    employer and its carrier raised the issue of transfer of
    liability to the Special Fund for Reopened Cases. Following a
    hearing, the Workers' Compensation Law Judge shifted liability to
    the Special Fund effective September 20, 2010. The Workers'
    Compensation Board reversed, finding that Workers' Compensation
    Law § 25-a relief was unavailable because the last payment of
    compensation was made in March 2011, less than three years from
    the request to shift liability to the Special Fund. The Board
    denied the subsequent request for reconsideration and/or full
    Board review. These appeals by the employer and the carrier
    ensued.
    Liability for a claim shifts to the Special Fund "when an
    application for compensation is made by an employee . . . after a
    lapse of seven years from the date of the injury . . . and also a
    lapse of three years from the date of the last payment of
    compensation" (Workers Compensation Law § 25-a [1]). Here, both
    of those time limitations were satisfied when claimant made an
    application to reopen the claim in February 2009. The Special
    Fund's "liability [was] triggered, as a matter of law, upon the
    -3-                  519727
    passage of time as provided by the statute" (Matter of Martin v
    New York Tel., 46 AD3d 1136, 1137 [2007]; see Matter of De Mayo v
    Rensselaer Polytech Inst., 74 NY2d 459, 462 [1989]; cf. Matter of
    Scoppo v American Brake Shoe Co., 43 AD2d 603, 604 [1973]; Matter
    of Gillette v Staub & Son, 8 AD2d 896 [1959]). Although relevant
    to the period of retroactivity, the carrier's payment of
    compensation in March 2011 and its September 2012 request that
    liability be transferred to the Special Fund are not
    determinative as to when that liability attached. To hold
    otherwise would be contrary to the purpose of the statute, which
    "is to shift the liability for paying stale claims to the
    [Special] Fund" (Matter of Early v New York Tel. Co., 57 AD3d
    1341, 1343 [2008] [internal quotation marks and citation
    omitted]; see Matter of Ercole v New York State Police, 118 AD3d
    1211, 1212-1213 [2014]).
    In view of the foregoing, the challenge to the denial of
    the request for reconsideration and/or full Board review is
    academic.
    McCarthy, J.P., Rose and Clark, JJ., concur.
    ORDERED that the decision filed December 10, 2013 is
    reversed, without costs, and matter remitted to the Workers'
    Compensation Board for further proceedings not inconsistent with
    this Court's decision.
    ORDERED that the appeal from the decision filed November
    10, 2014 is dismissed, as academic, without costs.
    ENTER:
    Robert D. Mayberger
    Clerk of the Court
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 519727

Judges: Devine

Filed Date: 12/3/2015

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 11/1/2024