Brooks v. Arkansas-Best Freight System, Inc.

444 S.W.2d 246, 247 Ark. 61, 1969 Ark. LEXIS 1062
CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas
DecidedSeptember 2, 1969
Docket5-4946
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 444 S.W.2d 246 (Brooks v. Arkansas-Best Freight System, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Brooks v. Arkansas-Best Freight System, Inc., 444 S.W.2d 246, 247 Ark. 61, 1969 Ark. LEXIS 1062 (Ark. 1969).

Opinion

J. Feed Jones, Justice.

This is a workmen’s compensation case and the facts are not in issue. The appellants, Brooks and Ferguson, were claimant employees under the Arkansas Workmen’s Compensation Law. Both of them sustained compensable back injuries resulting in permanent total disability and they both filed petitions to the Workmen’s Compensation Commission for lump sum settlements. Their petitions were granted by the Commission and the full amounts payable for permanent total disability were made to them. The petitions were filed and granted under authority of Ark. Stat. Ann. § 81-1319 (k) (Repl. 1960) which is as follows :

“Whenever the Commission determines that it is for the best interest of the parties entitled to compensation, and after due notice to all parties in interest of a hearing, the liability of the employer for compensation may be discharged by the payment of a lump sum equal to the present value of all future payments of compensation computed at four (4%) per centum discount, compounded annually. The probability of the death of the injured employee or other persons entitled to compensation before the expiration of the period during which they are entitled to compensation shall, in the absence of special circumstances making such course improper, be determined in accordance with the American Experience Table of Mortality. The probability of the happening of any other contingency affecting the amount or duration of compensation shall be disregarded, except the possibility of the remarriage of the widow which shall be determined in accordance with the Danish Annuity and Dutch Remarriage Table.”

After receipt of the lump sum payments, Brooks and Ferguson required additional medication for the treatment of their ilijuries, and claims were filed for the medical expenses accruing both before and after the lump sum payments but not specifically included therein. The employer voluntarily paid the medical bills accruing prior to the lump sum payments, but the claims for additional medical benefits accruing subsequent to the lump sum awards were controverted on the theory that the employer had discharged its entire liability and fully settled all claims, both present and future, by the payment of the lump sums under the award.

The Commission awarded the additional medical payments and on appeal to the Sebastian County Circuit Court the cases were consolidated and the awards of the Commission were reversed, the circuit court holding that the employer had discharged its total liability under the statute, by the payment of the lump sum awards.

Brooks and Ferguson have appealed to this court on the single question of law as to whether the payment of compensation for permanent disability in one lump sum under the Workmen’s Compensation Law of Arkansas discharges the employer or his compensation insurance carrier from additional liability for medical services and treatment occurring in the future.

Under the “definitions” section of the Workmen’s Compensation Law, Ark. Stat. Ann. § 81-1302, subsection (i) (Repl. 1960), is found the following:

“ ‘Compensation’ means the money allowance payable to the employee or to his dependents, and includes the allowances provided for in section 11 [§ 81-1311,] and funeral expense.”

Ark. Stat. Ann. § 81-1311 (Repl. 1960), above referred to, reads in part as follows:

“Medical and hospital services and supplies. The employer shall promptly provide for an injured employee such medical, surgical, hospital and nursing service, and medicine, crutches, artificial limbs and other apparatus as may be necessary during -the period of six [6] months after the injury, or for such time in excess thereof as the Commission, in its discretion, may require. If the employer fails to provide the services or things mentioned in the foregoing sentence within a reasonable time after knowledge of the injury, the Commission may direct that the injured employee obtain such service or thing at the expense of the employer, and any emergency treatment afforded the injured employee shall be at the expense of the employer.”

Thus, it is seen that medical services and funeral expenses, as well as money allowance payable to the employee, are included in the broad general statutory definition of “compensation.” In the context of benefits to the employee which are to be secured by the employer under the statute, Ark. Stat. Ann. § 81-1305 (Bepl. 1960), compensation payable to the employee for disability and the amounts payable in medical expenses are in the same category, but here the analogy ends.

Except as set out in the definition, the term “compensation,” as used throughout the statute, obviously refers to money benefits paid to the injured employee for disability. As examples,

Ark. Stat. Ann. § 81-1310 (Bepl. 1960):

“Compensation to the injured employee shall not be allowed for the first seven [7] days’ disability . . . compensation shall commence with the ninth [9th] day of disability . . .
Compensation payable to an injured emplayee for disability shall not exceed . . .
Compensation payable to the dependents for the death of an employee shall not exceed ...” (Emphasis supplied.)

Ark. Stat. Ann. § 81-1312 (Bepl. 1960):

“Compensation shall be computed on the average weekly wage ...” (Emphasis supplied.)

Ark. Stat. Ann. § 81-1313 (Repl. I960) provides;

“Compensation for disability. The money allowance payable to an injured employee for disability shall be as follows:
# # #
(c) Scheduled permanent injuries: An employee who sustains a permanent injury scheduled in this subsection shall receive, in addition to compensation for the healing period, sixty-five per centum [65%] of his average weekly wage for that period of time set out in the following schedule:
Jfc , ¶* 1? IP '
(d) Other cases: A permanent partial disability not scheduled in subsection (c) hereof shall be apportioned to the body as a whole, which shall have a value of 450 weeks, and there shall be paid compensation to the injured employee for the proportionate loss of use of the body as a whole resulting from the injury.* * *” (Emphasis supplied.)

Ark. Stat. Ann. § 81-1319 (Repl. 1960) provides:

“(a) Compensation shall be paid directly to the person entitled thereto without an award, except in those cases where liability has been controverted by the employer. If the compensation beneficiary is a mental incompetent or a minor of tender years or immature judgment, the Commission may in the exercise of its discretion direct that payment shall be made to a legally appointed guardian of the estate of such incompetent or minor.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Advanced Portable X-Ray, LLC v. Parker
2014 Ark. App. 548 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2014)
Thurman v. Clarke Industries, Inc.
872 S.W.2d 418 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 1994)
Varnell v. Union Carbide
779 S.W.2d 543 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 1989)
Time, D.C. Freight Lines v. Industrial Commission
713 P.2d 318 (Court of Appeals of Arizona, 1985)
Mad Butcher, Inc. v. Parker
628 S.W.2d 582 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 1982)
Model Laundry & Dry Cleaning v. Simmons
596 S.W.2d 337 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 1980)
Cropp v. State Workmen's Compensation Commissioner
236 S.E.2d 480 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1977)
Cropp v. STATE WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION COM'R
236 S.E.2d 480 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1977)
Mohawk Tire & Rubber Co. v. Brider
536 S.W.2d 126 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1976)
Mohawk Tire & Rubber Co. v. Briber
518 S.W.2d 499 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1975)
JACOB HARTZ SEED COMPANY v. Thomas
485 S.W.2d 200 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1972)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
444 S.W.2d 246, 247 Ark. 61, 1969 Ark. LEXIS 1062, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brooks-v-arkansas-best-freight-system-inc-ark-1969.