117 A.3d 441
Vt.2015Background
- Claimant injured Jan. 1996 while working as a Vermont game warden.
- Rule 18(a) imposed a duty on employers to determine permanent impairment at medical end result, effective May 1996.
- Treating physician’s July 8, 1996 notes indicated ongoing recovery with expected improvement; not a final end result.
- Claimant did not pursue related benefits until 2010; independent medical evaluations found 1% permanent impairment.
- State denied permanent partial disability benefits in 2011 as time-barred under six-year statute of limitations; listed Rule 18(a) as potential tolling mechanism.
- The commissioner held Rule 18(a) did not retroactively apply and later found the claim barred by the statute of limitations; claimant appealed.
- This Court certified three questions: waiver by scheduling evaluation; statute-of-limitations bar; and tolling based on Rule 18(a) compliance.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Waiver by scheduling a permanency evaluation | Claimant argues the adjuster’s agreement to schedule a permanency evaluation implicitly waived the statute defense. | State contends scheduling a review does not show an intentional waiver of the limitations defense. | No waiver by scheduling evaluation. |
| Whether the claim was time-barred by the statute of limitations | Claimant contends Rule 18(a) retroactively applied or tolls the period. | State argues the six-year limit bars the claim regardless of Rule 18(a). | Claim barred by the statute of limitations. |
| Whether Rule 18(a) tolls the statute of limitations | Rule 18(a) duty to determine impairment tolls the period. | Rule 18(a) is not retroactive or tolling in this context. | Rule 18(a) applies to the case but tolling does not extend the limitation period (bar remains). |
Key Cases Cited
- Longe v. Boise Cascade Corp., 171 Vt. 214 (2000) (employer no statutory duty to investigate permanent impairment; discovery rule not applicable to tolling)
- Sanz v. Douglas Collins Constr., 2006 VT 102 (2006) (retroactivity of post-injury amendments analyzed; procedural/remedial nature treated like statutes)
- Kraby v. VT Tel. Co., 2004 VT 120 (2004) (medical end result burden on employer; limitations timing commence at end result)
- Beebe v. Eisemann, 2012 VT 40 (2012) (equitable tolling/estoppel considerations in workers’ compensation)