BALL v. MULTIPLE INJURY TRUST FUND, 2015 OK 64

Background

Claimant injured her back at Goodyear on July 14, 2009; trial court later awarded permanent partial disability and found Crumby findings of 6% preexisting back disability and 8% preexisting psychological disability.
Claimant settled with employer in 2012 and then filed a Form 3F seeking permanent total disability (PTD) benefits from the Multiple Injury Trust Fund (the Fund), relying on medical opinions that combined injuries rendered her permanently totally disabled.
Medical examiners for the court and the Fund found no combinable prior adjudicated injuries and concluded Claimant was not permanently totally disabled from the work injury alone.
The Workers' Compensation trial court held the simultaneous Crumby findings were combinable with the 2009 injury and awarded PTD benefits from the Fund; a three-judge panel vacated that judgment; the Court of Civil Appeals (COCA) reversed in Claimant's favor.
The Oklahoma Supreme Court granted certiorari and held the 2005 statutory definition of "physically impaired person" requires prior (previous) adjudications of disability, so Crumby findings made contemporaneously with the subsequent injury cannot be treated as prior adjudications for Fund jurisdiction.

Issues

Issue	Claimant's Argument	Fund's Argument	Held
Whether a Crumby finding made with adjudication of a later injury counts as a "previous adjudication of disability" under 85 O.S. Supp. 2005 § 171	Crumby findings are "previous adjudications" and may be combined with the later injury to qualify Claimant as a "physically impaired person" for Fund recovery	The statutory phrase requires an adjudication of preexisting disability prior to the subsequent injury adjudication; simultaneous Crumby findings do not qualify	Held for the Fund: under the 2005 statute, a Crumby finding made contemporaneously with the later injury is not a previous adjudication and cannot establish Fund jurisdiction
Whether a claimant must be a "physically impaired person" to pursue Fund benefits under the 2005 amendments	Claimant argued post-2005 amendments removed the requirement to prove "physically impaired person" status before Fund recovery	Fund argued the jurisdictional requirement remains in § 171 and applies to §§ 171–176	Held for the Fund: claimant must be a "physically impaired person" under § 171 before the Workers' Compensation Court can award Fund benefits
Whether COCA's reading of § 172 permits Fund recovery without proving prior physical impairment	Claimant/COCA read § 172 (B)(3) and related 2005 text as allowing recovery without prior impairment showing	Fund argued COCA misread § 172 in isolation and ignored § 171's definitional requirement and legislative context	Held for the Fund: COCA erred; § 172 must be read with § 171 and the jurisdictional requirement stands
Whether Archer/Carson precedent and the 2005 statutory changes alter the rule on simultaneous adjudications	Claimant relied on legislative amendments and later cases to justify combinability	Fund relied on Carson and statutory text showing 2005 removed language that had allowed Crumby findings to qualify as prior adjudications	Held for the Fund: Carson controls under the 2005 statutory language; simultaneous Crumby findings are not prior adjudications

Key Cases Cited

J.C. Penney Co. v. Crumby, 584 P.2d 1325 (Okla. 1978) (defines Crumby findings and their purpose in allocation of employer liability)
Special Indemnity Fund v. Carson, 852 P.2d 157 (Okla. 1993) (held contemporaneous Crumby findings are not prior adjudications under prior statute)
Special Indem. Fund v. Figgins, 831 P.2d 1379 (Okla. 1992) (explains Fund supplements employer liability for combined disabilities)
St. John Medical Center v. Bilby, 160 P.3d 978 (Okla. 2007) (statutory construction principles and discussion of Fund amendments)
Multiple Injury Trust Fund v. Wade, 180 P.3d 1205 (Okla. 2008) (describes Fund liability as derived from employer's primary obligation)
Archer v. Special Indemnity Fund, 847 P.2d 791 (Okla. 1993) (addresses separately adjudicated simultaneous injuries and legislative amendments)