Marcroft v. Labor Commission, 356 P.3d 164

Marc roft was injuréd in 2012; he received workers' compensation benefits.
Before adjudication, Marcroft and respondents agreed the at-fault driver's $15,000 auto policy would be set off against workers' compensation.
The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) decision was appealed by Respondents to the Utah Labor Commission Appeals Board.
The Board modified the ALJ's decision to allow subtracting the third-party recovery from the workers' compensation benefits, stating the amount was $19,000.
Marc roft challenges only the amount, arguing it should be $15,000 minus costs and attorney fees; Respondents argue the issue wasn't properly preserved.
The court upholds the Board's order without reaching the merits because Marcroft failed to preserve the issue; it rejects the plain error argument raised for the first time in reply.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether subrogation amount should be $15,000 minus costs/fees or $19,000.	Marcroft argues $15,000 minus costs/fees.	Respondents rely on Board preservation and do not contest amount aside from preservation.	Issue not preserved; affirmed Board.

Christensen v. 1, 219 P.3d 58 (2009 UT App 241) (preservation and plain-error considerations in appellate review)
Christensen, 251 P.3d 810 (2011 UT 20) (affirming in part, reversing in part; preserves standard)
Schefski ex rel. Coleman v. Stevens, 17 P.3d 1122 (2000 UT 98) (preservation and plain-error principles in UT appellate review)
State v. Wells, 318 P.3d 1251 (2014 UT App 13) (guidance on preservation in appellate briefing)
State v. Mitchell, 318 P.3d 238 (2013 UT App 289) (plain-error/preservation considerations)
Davis v. Davis, 263 P.3d 520 (2011 UT App 311) (preservation and appellate review standards)