Saylor v. Westar Energy, Inc.
256 P.3d 828
| Kan. | 2011Background
- Saylor, a Westar employee for 33 years, suffered a repetitive knee injury related to job duties requiring kneeling, climbing, and manual labor.
- Saylor’s initial knee issue occurred ~20 years earlier; he later sought medical treatments and reported trouble to supervisors but did not initially file workers' compensation paperwork.
- Saylor underwent knee replacement surgery on February 7, 2006, after being advised by a doctor; surgery was not authorized by Westar and bills were paid by his personal health insurance.
- Saylor learned, during recovery, that his injury might be work-related and filed a workers’ compensation claim on March 28, 2006, after consulting a workers’ compensation attorney.
- ALJ found the injury work-related with a date of accident March 28, 2006; Board affirmed, adopting March 28 as the date of accident and finding liability for unauthorized medical bills under 44-510j(h).
- On appeal, Westar challenged (1) the date of accident for repetitive trauma, (2) the notification provisions of 44-508(d), and (3) Westar’s liability for unauthorized medical expenses under 44-510j(h); petition granted.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Date of accident for repetitive trauma | Saylor’s date should be last date worked (Feb 6, 2006). | Statute 44-508(d) assigns March 28, 2006 as the date of accident when notified. | March 28, 2006 is the date of accident per 44-508(d). |
| Effect of 44-508(d) on notification and defenses | Plain language supports March 28 as date; notification timing is maintained. | Literal reading yields absurd results; would undermine notice and defenses. | Legislature intended 44-508(d) plain language; Court rejects Westar’s broader rewrite and affirms March 28 date. |
| Unauthorized medical bills liability under 44-510j(h) | Employer knowledge and failure to provide medical care triggers 44-510j(h) liability. | 44-510h(b)(2) limits liability to $500 absent authorization; 44-510j(h) not applicable here. | Westar liable under 44-510j(h) for unreimbursed surgery costs; substantial evidence supports notice and refusal to provide care. |
Key Cases Cited
- Kimbrough v. Univ. of Kansas Med. Ctr., 276 Kan. 853 (2003) (last day worked rule for date of injury in some contexts)
- Mitchell v. Petsmart, Inc., 291 Kan. 153 (2010) (addressed last-day-worked rule and repetitive trauma context)
- In re K.M.H., 285 Kan. 53 (2007) (plain-language interpretation guidance for statutory text)
- Robinett v. The Haskell Co., 270 Kan. 95 (2000) (statutory interpretation principles for workers' compensation)
- Bergstrom v. Spears Manufacturing Co., 289 Kan. 605 (2009) (legislative history respect in statutory interpretation)
- Casco v. Armour Swift-Eckrich, 283 Kan. 508 (2007) (application of workers' compensation provisions to factual scenarios)
- State v. Spencer, 291 Kan. 796 (2011) (legislative knowledge presumed when enacting law)
- State ex rel. Stovall v. Meneley, 271 Kan. 355 (2001) (statutory intent and interpretation framework)