Edwards v. Cherry City Electric, Inc.Edwards v. Cherry City Electric, Inc.
Claimant suffered a compensable, work-related injury. He died of causes unrelated to the injury before receiving a compensation award. He had no spouse or dependents who survived him. The issue is whether claimant’s personal representative could pursue an award of permanent disability benefits that accrued before claimant’s death when claimant left no surviving spouse or dependents. The Workers’ Compensation Board concluded that the personal representative could not and, further, that the personal representative could not collect a burial allowance under
Claimant’s injury occurred on September 21, 1991. He filed a claim with SAIF in November 1991, which SAIF denied. On April 10, 1992, a board referee set aside SAIF’s denial. SAIF requested review. The board affirmed the referee’s order. Finally, in February 1993, SAIF sent a letter to claimant stating that his claim had been accepted and that benefits would be determined.
Claimant died on August 29, 1993. On October 19, 1993, the Department of Insurance and Finance 1 issued a determination order that awarded claimant temporary partial disability benefits but no permanent benefits. Claimant’s personal representative sought reconsideration of that order, arguing that claimant should have been awarded permanent partial disability benefits. The department agreed and issued an order on reconsideration that awarded claimant 17 percent unscheduled permanent disability.
In response, SAIF requested a hearing and argued that the order on reconsideration was void because the personal representative lacked authority to request reconsideration by the department. The board concluded that the order on reconsideration was void. It reasoned as follows: The legislature amended
As an alternative ground for its decision, the board held that the personal representative was not a person who could request reconsideration or a hearing because he was not among the parties identified in
“(1) In case of the death of a worker entitled to compensation, whether eligibility therefor or the amount thereof [has] been determined, payments shall be made for the period during which the worker, if surviving, would have been entitled thereto.
“(2) If the worker’s death occurs prior to issuance of a notice of closure or making of a determination underORS 656.268 , the insurer or the self-insured employer shall proceed underORS 656.268 and determine compensation for permanent partial disability, if any.
“* * ‡ * :|=
*582 “(4) If the worker dies before filing a request for hearing, the persons described in subsection (5) of this section shall be entitled to file a request for hearing and to pursue the matter to final determination as to all issues presented by the request for hearing.
“(5) The payments provided in this section shall be made to the persons who would have been entitled to receive death benefits if the injury causing the disability had been fatal. In the absence of persons so entitled, a burial allowance may be paid not to exceed the lesser of either the unpaid award or the amount payable byORS 656.204. ”
(Emphasis supplied.)
Claimant died from causes unrelated to his injury before issuance of a notice of closure. Thus, pursuant to
Claimant’s personal representative argues that, at that point, he was entitled to request a hearing pursuant to
SAIF argues, however, that only those individuals who would have been entitled to receive death benefits had the injury been fatal are entitled to request a hearing under
*583
In
Trice,
the claimant had requested a hearing on her entitlement to temporary disability benefits. She died of a cause unrelated to her injury before the hearing could take place.
That conclusion may appear anomalous because it seems to leave no one in a position to pursue the burial benefits that
The provision was adopted in 1959 when the workers’ compensation system was administered by a state agency, the State Industrial Accident Commission. 2 As adopted, it gave the agency the discretion to award a burial allowance to the estate of a deceased worker from the trust fund that it administered. Nothing suggests that the agency was required to make such an award. Moreover, it is unclear the extent to which a decision to deny a burial award could have been challenged on review as an abuse of discretion by the agency. 3
With the changes made to the workers’ compensation system since 1959, there now is no state agency to which
*584
a worker’s personal representative can make a request for discretionary payment of a burial allowance. If such a benefit is to be paid, the discretion to make the payment now appears to rest with the insurers and self-insured employers who are responsible for paying workers’ compensation benefits. Under that circumstance, there is no need to give personal representatives the right to pursue claims under
Affirmed.
Notes
The Department of Insurance and Finance is now the Department of Consumer and Business Services. Or Laws 1993, ch 744, § 1.
See
Or Laws 1959, ch 450, § 3;
former
See former
The personal representative raised no issue on appeal about whether he could collect a burial allowance based on an unpaid award of temporary disability benefits, as opposed to an award of permanent disability benefits.
See Trice,