EVANS & ASSOCIATES UTILITY SERVICES v. Espinosa
2011 OK 81
| Okla. | 2011Background
- The Oklahoma Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve a conflict over 85 O.S.2001 § 22(7) concerning the sum of permanent partial disability awards and its exclusions.
- § 22(7) provides two caps: 100% PPD (excluding MI Fund, amputations, and surgeries) and 520 weeks; the statute excludes certain awards from these limits.
- Espinosa previously received 424.1 weeks of PPD in 2006 and 2009 for various injuries, with a 2009 award of 409 weeks for shoulders/hands, raising the question of cumulative limits.
- The trial court denied defendant’s request to cap the current award at the remaining 95.9 weeks under § 22(7).
- The three-judge panel and the Court of Civil Appeals had disagreed on whether surgery-related awards are excluded from both the 100% and 520-week caps.
- The Court held that exclusions for MI Fund awards, amputations, and surgeries apply to both the 100% and 520-week limitations, and remanded to determine the portion attributable to surgeries.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 22(7) exclusions apply to both caps | Espinosa argues exclusions apply only to the 100% cap. | Evans argues the exclusions apply only to the 520-week cap. | Exclusions apply to both the 100% and 520-week caps. |
| Whether surgeries, amputations, and MI Fund awards are excluded from both limits | Espinosa contends surgeries/amputations/MI Fund awards should be excluded from both limits. | Evans contends only certain exclusions apply to one limit. | Those awards are excluded from both limits. |
| How prior awards affect the current cumulative calculation | Espinosa's prior weeks should reduce the remaining allowable weeks for the current award, consistent with § 22(7). | Evans contends the panel’s deductions were miscalculated and inappropriate without clear allocation to surgeries. | Remand to determine the exact portions attributable to surgeries for exclusion. |
Key Cases Cited
- Rivas v. Parkland Manor, 12 P.3d 452 (2000 OK 68) (legislative amendments and refusals to preclude prior disabilities under 100% cap)
- King Mfg. v. Meadows, 127 P.3d 584 (2005 OK 78) (injury vs. change in condition; time-of-injury rule for applying § 22(7))
- Sizemore v. Continental Cas. Co., 142 P.3d 47 (2006 OK 36) (statutory interpretation and purposes of workers' compensation)
- Parret v. UNICCO Serv. Co., 127 P.3d 572 (2005 OK 54) (varying interpretations of cumulative disability limits)