DocketNumber: JM-361
Judges: Jim Mattox
Filed Date: 7/2/1985
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 2/18/2017
I The Attorney General of Texas JIM MATTOX Oc,tober 18. 1985 Attorney General Supreme Cart Building Its.MsrgsretM. Uaiael OpinionNo. JM-361 P. 0. Box 12548 chsirmsn Aus!in. TX. 78711. 2548 Texas IndustrialAccidentBoard Be: Whether the IndustrialAcci- 51214752501 First Floor dent Board may approve a Cow- Telex 9101874-1367 Telecopier 51214750286 200 E. RiversideDrive promiseSettlementAgreementwhich Austin,Texas 78704 covers OalY future medical expenses after liabilityfor cou- 714 Jackson, Suite 700 pensationbenefitsis admitted Dallas, TX. 752024506 21417428944 Dear Ms. Haisel: 4824 Alberta Ave.. Suite 160 You ask two questionsabout the settlementof workers coepensa- El Paso. TX. 799052793 tion claims: 915/533-3484 1. If an injury is one enumeratedin article 1001 Texas. Suite 700 8306, section lla, and if the carrier admits HOUS,O~, TX. 77002-3111 liability while the case is peuding before the 713/223-5886 IndustrialAccidentBoard and wakes payments,way the board japprovea CompromiseSettlementAgree- ment which settles only the future medical 806 Broadway. Suite 312 Lubbock, TX. 79401.3479 expensesof such claimant? 0OW747.5238 2. If the board has the authorityto approvea Compromise!SettlementAgreement in such a case, 4309 N. Tenth, Bulla B McAllen, TX. 78501-1885 may it apIlrove an attorney'sfee? 5121602.4547 The Texas Workers'CompensationLaw, articles8306 through83091, V.T.C.S.,createsa systemwhich pays compensationand other benefits ZOO ~sin Plaza, Suite 400 to a worker or a worker's beneficiariesfor incapacity or death San Antonio, TX. 782052797 resulting from a work-relatedinjury. Section lla of article 8306. 512f225-4191 V.T.C.S.. sets forth several specificinjuries for which "incapacity shall conclusivelybe held to be total and permanent,"thus qualifying An Equal OppOrlWoit,‘l the claimant for lifetime benefits under section 10(b) of article Affirmative Action Employer 8306. As will be shown in the discussion to follow, the workers' compensationstatute13reflect different treatment for swards of the board and for approvalby the hoard of CompromiseSettlementAgree- ments. With regsrd,to awards, compensationbenefits and medical benefits are covered by differentatstutes. This is not necessarily the csse with regsrclto CompromiseSettlementAgreements;a Compromise p. 1654 Us. MsrgaretM. Maisel - Page 2 (JM-361) SettlementAgreement usually attempts to settle liability for both compensationbenefitsand medicalbenefits. Your questionpresentsan anomalous situationwhere I:beparties wish to settle only medical benefitsin a CompromiseSettlementAgreement. Under article 8306, section 7. when an injured worker notifies the carrierof a work-relatrdinjury,the carrieris obligatedto pay for such medical expenses as may reasonablybe requiredat the time of the injury and at an; time thereafter to cure and relieve fromFiG%fects naturallyresultingfrom the injury. (Empha:sis added). See Texas Employers'InsurfEce Associationv. Chappell. 494 S.U.2d 159. 160 (Tex. 1973); Peeples v. Home IndemnityCornpane,617 S.W.2d 274
(Tex.Civ. AppP.- San Antl>nio 1981, no writ). The additionof "at any time thereafter"was to provide for medical expensesunlimitedas to the date at which they become necessary. See Pearce v. Texas anployersInsuranceAssociation,403 S.W.2d 493.496, 498 (Tex. Civ. APP- -B1966),aff'duriam,412 S.W.2d 647
(Tex. 1967). Nevertheless,section5 Iofarticle8307 provides,in part: Notwithstandingany other provision of this law, as amended, no award of the Board, and no judgment of the court, having jurisdictionof a claim against thr, association for the cost or expense of items of medical aid, hospital ser- vices, nursing, c'h:lropractic services,medicines or prostheticappliancesfurnishedto an employee under circumstancescrestinga liabilitytherefor on the part of the associationunder the pro- visions of this 1~. shall include in such award or judgmentany cc’stor expenseof any such items not actually furc.ishedto and received by the employeeprior to Ihe date of said award or judg- ment. . . . (Emphslsisadded). Notwithstandinasection5. the IndustrialAccidentBoard and the courts have approved Comprtmdse SettlementAgreements which settle liabilityfor future medical expenses. IndemnityCompany,648 S.U.2i 283, 284 (k%?%&~ kyy z: E:iE$ InsuranceCompany of New Yo$, 577 S.U.2d 35.3.354 (Tex. civ. App. - Houston [14thDist.] 1979. writ ref'd n.r.e.). These cases.however. settlement of all future &dical expenses. Liability for future medical expenses is a diiferent question from whether specific p. 1655 ns. MargaretM. Maiael - Page 3 (JM-361) expensesare necessary and ressonable. The court in Pearce v. Texas EmployersInsuranceAssocist``on, 403 S.W.2d493. dealt with the effect of section 5 of article 8YF on a Compromise SettlementAgreement which settled both liability for and the amount of future~medical expenseswith a sum certain. The court held that section 5 did not affect the board's authority under section 12 of article 8307 to compronise claims for future medical services because section 5 applies only to "awards"of the board and to judgmentsof thecourt. 403 S.W.2d at 498
. In Attorney General Opinion UW-333 (1957), this office reached the same conclusion. The Pearce case was affirmedby the Texas Suprane Court. !;eePearce v. Texas Employers Insurance Association,412 S.W.2d 647
'FEx. 1967). Thus, CompromiseSettlceent Agreewentsserve a differentpurpose from final awards of the board and are thereforesubject to differentstatutes.See 403 S.W.2d at 498
; see also Kinsey v. NortJem InsuranceCompany3 Nw York. 577 S.W.2dat 354-55. Accordingly,section l:! of article 8307 provides the bosrd's basic authorityto approve Cmpromise SettlementAgreements. Section 12 providesin part: Where the liabi$ty of the associationor the extent of the injury of the employeeis uncertain, indefinite or incltpableof being satisfactorily established,the bclardmay approveany compromise, adjustment,settlenlent or commutationthereofwade between the partier;.(Emphasisadded). Severe and immediatefiasncialneed way tempt an injuredworker to settlea right to lifetimr:benefitsfor iramediate cash in an awount which is inadequateto compensateor to provide medical care for the claimantfor life. See Walden v. Royal Globe InsuranceCompany,577 S.W.2d 296
. 298-99xxT%v. ,APP. - Beaumont 1978, writ ref'd n.r.e.). Clearly, when a c:laimaniV has an uncertain claim, he may validly settle for any amount which would be less than the amount of lifetimebenefitshe might receive in an award; this is the nature of a CompromiseSettlementAgreewent. Some compromises.however, can be grossly inadequate, As indicatedin AttorneyGeneral OpinionWW-333, the board has discretionunder section 12 in dischargingits duty to protect injuredworkers. Consequently,under section12 the board x refuse to approveany settlnwnt which does not adequatelyprotectthe rights of an injured workaz -See Attorney General Opinion UW-333 (1957). In the instant case, however. we believe that the language of section 12 of article8307. %tselfpreventsthe bosrd from approvinga Compromise Settlement Agreem'cntwhich finally settles only future lnedicalexpenses after thl6 carrier admits liability and nakes compensationpayments for ML injury enumerated in section lla of p. 1656 I . Ms. Margaretn. Liaise1- Page 4 (JR-361) article 8306. Section 12. by its terms. requiresuncertaintyeither to (1) liability,or (2) tie extent of the injury. If the carrier admits liability for lifetime compensationbenefits for au injury enumeratedin section Lla in:tlethe case is pending before the Board aud makes payments,It is difficultto conceivehow uncertaintycan still exist as to liabili.tyfor necessary and reasonable future medical expensesfor the iuj~ury.The only questionremainingcan be over the amount of future stadicalexpenses. i.e., whether specific expenses are in fact necessary and reasonable. This question will always be "uncertain." Comequently, if we interpreted"uncertainty" in section12 of article83C7 to cover uncertaintyas to the amount of specific medical sxpenses, the provision would not limit any settlementsand would thus bave no purpose. Section lla of article 8306 establishesthat certsLn emmerated injuries are conclusively held to be total and pernanra,t; thus it is unlikelythat the extent of the specific injury, either as to degree or duration, will be uncertain. We believe tha.ta disagreementabout whether specific medical expenses are reag,anableand necessary will not justify settlementof all futureuel:lcalexpensesunder section 12 of article 8307. In light of this result.we do not addressyour suggestionthat the prerequisiteto settlementof a "disputed"case in section 10(d) of article8306 also applier,to the situationat band. Your second questionis conditionedupon an affirmativeresponse to your first question. Iecause of our negative response to this question,we do not reach your secondquestion. SUMMARY The IndustrialA.ccidentBoard nay not approvea CompromiseSettleiaent Agreenentwhen the carrier admits liability‘bleforethe board and makes con- pensation paynents for an injury enunarated in section lla of article 8306. V.T.C.S..and seeks to finally settle only future medical expensesin the CompromiseSet.tlenentAgreenent. J-/h Very truly yours . JIn HATTOX AttorneyGeneralof Texas TOMGREEN First AssistantAttorneyGereral DAVID R. RICHABDS ExecutiveAssistantAttorney General p. 1657 r -. . a Ms. Margaretn. Maisel - Page:5 (``-361) ROBERT GRAY SpecialAssistantAttorneyGtrueral RICK GILPIN Chairman,OpinionComnittee Preparedby JenniferRiggs AssistantAttorney General APPROVED: OPINIONCOMMITTEE Rick Gilpin.Chai- Colin Carl Susan Garrison Tony Gulllory Jim Noellinger JenniferRiggs Nancy Sutton Sarah Woelk p. 1658