Barrios v. Zing, LLC & State Ins Fund
162 Idaho 566
| Idaho | 2017Background
- Claimant Josue Barrios suffered a severe traumatic brain injury in a workplace fall, leaving him totally and permanently disabled and unable to care for himself.
- Treating physician recommended appointment of a professional guardian (person) and conservator (estate) as medically necessary.
- Ada County magistrate court appointed a guardian and conservator.
- Employer Zing LLC and its surety, Idaho State Insurance Fund, refused to pay guardian/conservator fees, claiming those costs are not compensable under Idaho Code § 72-432(1).
- The Industrial Commission ordered the employer/surety to pay the guardian and conservator fees; the employer/surety appealed to the Idaho Supreme Court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Barrios) | Defendant's Argument (Zing/Surety) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether fees/expenses of guardian and conservator are compensable under I.C. § 72-432(1) | Guardian/conservator services are “other attendance” required because claimant cannot manage medical, personal, or financial affairs; physician said they are medically necessary | “Other attendance” should be limited to medical-type services; guardian/conservator fees are non-medical and not recoverable | Court affirmed: “other attendance” includes non-medical services like guardianship/conservatorship necessary for injured employee’s care and protection |
Key Cases Cited
- Irvine v. Perry, 78 Idaho 132, 299 P.2d 97 (1956) (home nursing by spouse remained employer’s statutory responsibility under earlier statute)
- Burch v. Potlatch Forests, Inc., 82 Idaho 323, 353 P.2d 1076 (1960) ("other treatment" includes nonmedical rehabilitative care such as dental bridge)
- Hamilton v. Boise Cascade Corp., 84 Idaho 209, 370 P.2d 191 (1962) (domiciliary/nursing-home care is within services contemplated by the statute even if not strictly medical)