Saint Joseph Hospital v. Frye, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 643

Angela Frye sustained a work-related cervical and lumbar injury on Jan. 3, 2008 and filed a workers’ compensation claim (2008 claim); an ALJ held a final hearing Apr. 9, 2009 and issued an opinion awarding benefits on June 2, 2009.
On Apr. 23, 2009 (after the Apr. 9 hearing but before the ALJ’s decision), Frye suffered a second work-related lumbar injury from a fall.
Frye filed a separate claim for the Apr. 2009 accident on Apr. 20, 2010; St. Joseph denied it as untimely under KRS 342.270(1) for failure to join the new cause of action to the pending 2008 claim.
The ALJ dismissed the 2010 claim as waived under KRS 342.270(1) because Frye knew or should have known of the April 2009 injury while the 2008 claim was pending.
The Workers’ Compensation Board reversed, reasoning that the 2008 claim was not “pending” after the final hearing (because regs provide no mechanism to reopen proof after hearing), so Frye was not required to join the 2009 claim; the Court of Appeals affirmed.
The Kentucky Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals and remanded for a merits decision on the Apr. 2009 claim, holding that the 2008 claim was not pending between the final hearing and the ALJ’s decision for purposes of KRS 342.270(1).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Frye was required by KRS 342.270(1) to file and join the Apr. 2009 claim to her pending 2008 claim	Frye argued her Apr. 2009 cause had not accrued or, alternatively, that the 2008 claim was not "pending" after the hearing, so joinder was not required	St. Joseph argued KRS 342.270(1) requires joinder of causes that accrued or should have been known during the pendency of a claim; relying on Kroger Co. v. Jones, it asserted a claim remains pending until appellate remedies are exhausted	Court held joinder was not required here because the 2008 claim was not "pending" between the final hearing and the ALJ’s decision; Frye’s 2010 claim was not waived and the case remanded for merits

Kroger Co. v. Jones, 125 S.W.3d 241 (Ky. 2004) (discussed language that a claim remains pending until appeals are exhausted; court finds that language dicta and distinguishable)
Adams v. NHC Healthcare, 199 S.W.3d 163 (Ky. 2006) (ALJ lacks regulatory authority to accept proof filed after claim submitted for decision)
T.J. Maxx v. Blagg, 274 S.W.3d 436 (Ky. 2008) (no regulation authorizes taking additional proof after claim has been heard, briefed, and taken under submission)
Kentucky Employers Mut. Ins. v. Coleman, 236 S.W.3d 9 (Ky. 2007) (standard of review: statutory interpretation reviewed de novo)