State ex rel. ISP Minerals, Inc., Relator v. The Labor and Industrial Relations Commission
2015 Mo. LEXIS 140
Mo.2015Background
- Supreme Court of Missouri en banc reviews whether the LIRC can determine Employee’s entitlement to future medical care under a settlement that left such care open.
- Employee and Employer settled the workers’ compensation claim, with lump sum for permanent partial disability and an agreement to keep future medical care open, plus authorized monitoring by Dr. Ojile.
- ALJ approved the settlement under section 287.390.1; Employer paid the lump sum and monitored medical costs, but refused to pay certain inhaler medicines prescribed for future care.
- The LIRC initially held it retained jurisdiction to determine liability for future medical care and ordered evidentiary proceedings before the Division of Workers’ Compensation.
- Employer petitioned for a writ of prohibition, arguing the settlement divested the commission of jurisdiction; the court held the commission retains jurisdiction to determine open future medical care under the workers’ compensation scheme.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does §287.390.1 divest the commission of jurisdiction over future medical care? | ISP Minerals: settlement divests the commission entirely once approved. | Labor and Industrial Relations Commission: settlement may leave future medical care open; commission retains jurisdiction. | No; settlement does not divest the commission. |
| Is the claim for future medical benefits under §287.140.1 within the commission’s exclusive domain? | Employer’s view would require circuit court to determine future medical liability. | Future medical determinations are within the commission under the workers’ compensation framework. | Yes; the commission retains exclusive jurisdiction over open future medical benefits. |
Key Cases Cited
- Mosier v. St. Joseph Lead Co., 205 S.W.2d 227 (Mo. App. 1947) (settlements leaving no future medical care divest jurisdiction)
- Shockley v. Laclede Elec. Co-Op., 825 S.W.2d 44 (Mo. App. 1992) (settlements closing out claims divest jurisdiction)
- Weiss v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc., 117 S.W.2d 682 (Mo. App. 1938) (indeterminate future medical care keeps commission jurisdiction)
- Blissenbach v. General Motors Assembly Div., 776 S.W.2d 889 (Mo. App. 1989) (open future medical care keeps commission jurisdiction)
- State ex rel. Rival Co. v. Gant, 945 S.W.2d 475 (Mo. App. 1997) (future medical determinations lie with the Division of Workers’ Compensation)
- Lutes v. Schaefer, 431 S.W.3d 550 (Mo. App. 2014) (exclusivity of workers’ compensation remedies; no fault not required)
- Mummert v. Standard Register Co., 880 S.W.2d 925 (Mo. App. 1994) (exclusive scope of workers’ compensation remedies; appellate discussion of open future claims)