MULTIPLE INJURY TRUST FUND v. MACKEY
2017 OK 75
| Okla. | 2017Background
- Jolid Mackey had multiple prior adjudications of disability (right arm/hand, both hands, lungs) and suffered a later workplace injury to his left shoulder in Feb. 2013.
- The Workers' Compensation Court of Existing Claims found Mackey was a "physically impaired person" under 85 O.S.2011 § 402(A)(4) and that the combination of prior adjudicated disabilities and the 2013 left-shoulder injury produced permanent total disability (PTD); it awarded liability against the Multiple Injury Trust Fund (MITF).
- MITF sought review; the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals vacated the award, reading the proviso in § 402(A)(4) to limit combinable prior adjudications to those involving the same body part as the last injury.
- The Court of Civil Appeals treated the proviso as a jurisdictional requirement: a claimant must have prior adjudication to the same body part as the most recent injury to qualify as "physically impaired."
- The Oklahoma Supreme Court granted certiorari and concluded the proviso instead governs which preexisting (including Crumby) disability findings may be combined for MITF liability, not the jurisdictional definition of "physically impaired person."
- The Supreme Court reinstated the trial-court award: Mackey’s prior adjudications could be combined with his left-shoulder injury to reach PTD and MITF liability, and a claimant may be permanently totally disabled more than once.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (MITF) | Defendant's Argument (Mackey) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the proviso in § 402(A)(4) limit which prior adjudications count toward the jurisdictional "physically impaired person" definition? | Proviso imposed a jurisdictional same-body-part requirement; Mackey’s prior adjudications did not involve his left shoulder, so he was not "physically impaired." | The proviso governs combinability for MITF liability (i.e., which preexisting disabilities may be combined with the last injury), not jurisdiction. | Held: proviso governs combinability for liability, not jurisdiction; Mackey qualified as physically impaired and award stands. |
| Can a claimant who was previously adjudicated PTD obtain a later PTD award from MITF after a new injury? | MITF: claimant cannot (or should not) get PTD compensation more than once for the same adjudicated disabilities; prior PTD adjudication is final and limits Fund liability. | Mackey: prior PTD adjudication is fact-specific and not conclusive on condition at a later time; a claimant may be PTD more than once if separate injuries occur. | Held: prior PTD adjudication is not dispositive; a claimant may be permanently totally disabled more than once if different injuries produce PTD. |
| Do Crumby findings (contemporaneous findings of preexisting disability) count for MITF combinability under § 402(A)(4) proviso? | MITF argued prior payments and finality limit combinability; proviso should not expand Fund liability by allowing Crumby findings to be combined. | Mackey invoked combination of prior adjudications and last injury (and the Court treated proviso as applying to combinability where appropriate). | Held: proviso allows combination of Crumby-type preexisting disability with last-injury disability only when the proviso’s same-body-part condition is met for combinability purposes; statute read with § 404 supports this effect. |
| Was the Court of Civil Appeals’ reading (treating proviso as jurisdictional) correct? | MITF supported reversal of the trial award and argued for limitation; Court of Civil Appeals held proviso jurisdictional. | Mackey challenged that reading and urged that the proviso concerns liability combining rules. | Held: Court of Civil Appeals erred; proviso is not a jurisdictional condition but a rule limiting which preexisting adjudications can be combined for MITF liability. |
Key Cases Cited
- Multiple Injury Trust Fund v. Wade, 180 P.3d 1205 (Okla. 2008) (adjudication of last injury must be completed before MITF recovery)
- J.C. Penney Co. v. Crumby, 584 P.2d 1325 (Okla. 1978) (Crumby findings described; contemporaneous finding of preexisting disability)
- Ball v. Multiple Injury Trust Fund, 360 P.3d 499 (Okla. 2015) (Legislature excluded certain Crumby findings from jurisdictional previous-adjudication category; interpretive background)
- Special Indemnity Fund v. Doughty, 558 P.2d 396 (Okla. 1976) (prior adjudication of permanent disability is not conclusive on a later fact question; return to work is conclusive evidence of loss of PTD)
- Special Indemnity Fund v. Betterton, 925 P.2d 86 (Okla. Civ. App. 1996) (a claimant may be permanently totally disabled more than once from separate injuries)
- Multiple Injury Trust Fund v. Sugg, 362 P.3d 222 (Okla. 2015) (context on legislative intent and limits to Fund liability)