Murray Energy Corporation v. Mark Smith

• Court: Court of Appeals of Kentucky
• Decided: March 23, 2023
• Docket: 2022 CA 000333
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

RENDERED: MARCH 24, 2023; 10:00 A.M. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals

NO. 2022-CA-0333-WC

MURRAY ENERGY CORPORATION APPELLANT

PETITION FOR REVIEW OF A DECISION v. OF THE WORKERS’ COMPENSATION BOARD ACTION NO. WC-20-00189

MARK SMITH; MUHLENBERG COUNTY COAL; HONORABLE JONATHAN R. WEATHERBY, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE; AND WORKERS’ COMPENSATION BOARD APPELLEES

OPINION AFFIRMING

** ** ** ** **

BEFORE: DIXON, MCNEILL, AND TAYLOR, JUDGES.

TAYLOR, JUDGE: Murray Energy Corporation (Murray Energy) petitions this

Court to review a February 25, 2022, opinion and order of the Workers’

Compensation Board (Board) affirming an administrative law judge’s award of

permanent partial disability benefits to Mark Smith. Relevant herein, Smith filed a claim for workers’ compensation

benefits for cumulative trauma injuries to his left knee, low back, shoulders, and

neck.1 Smith had been employed by Murray Energy from September 11, 2006, to

March 2, 2019. Smith was then employed by Muhlenberg County Coal

(Muhlenberg Coal) from March 3, 2019, to December 27, 2019, when he was laid

off. A central issue between the parties was whether Murray Energy or

Muhlenberg Coal would be liable for the alleged cumulative trauma injuries

suffered by Smith.

In a September 3, 2021, Opinion, Award, and Order, the

Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) determined that Smith’s cumulative trauma

injury to his low back was not filed timely per Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS)

342.185 and was time-barred. The ALJ then found that Smith suffered cumulative

trauma injuries to his left knee, cervical spine (neck), and shoulders (collectively

referred to as cumulative trauma injuries) that were work-related and that resulted

in permanent partial disability (PPD). As to whether Murray Energy or

Muhlenberg Coal were responsible for payment of PPD benefits, the ALJ found

compelling “the testimony of [Smith] that his safety position with Muhlenberg

1 Mark Smith also filed claims alleging other work-related injuries; however, those claims are not at issue in this appeal.

-2- County Coal did not contribute to his cumulative trauma injuries because his duties

were sedentary and consisted of office work.” September 3, 2021, Opinion,

Award, and Order at 10. In particular, the ALJ stated:

[Smith] specifically testified that he did not go underground or perform any of the physically demanding duties that he described performing for Murray Energy d/b/a Ken America while at Muhlenberg County Coal. The ALJ therefore finds that the last employer for the purposes of [Smith’s] cumulative trauma injuries was Murray Energy d/b/a Ken America.

September 3, 2021, Opinion, Award, and Order at 10-11. As a consequence, the

ALJ concluded that Murray Energy was liable for payment of PPD benefits owed

to Smith. Murray Energy did not file a petition for reconsideration of the ALJ’s

opinion.

Murray Energy then sought review with the Board. Murray Energy

argued that the ALJ erred by finding it liable for payment of PPD benefits due as a

result of Smith’s cumulative trauma injuries. Instead, Murray Energy asserted that

Muhlenberg Coal was liable. By opinion and order entered February 25, 2022, the

Board affirmed the ALJ’s September 3, 2021, Opinion, Award, and Order. As a

result, Murray Energy sought review in the Court of Appeals.

Our review of the Board’s opinion is limited. We merely review the

Board’s opinion to determine whether it “overlooked or misconstrued controlling

statutes or precedent, or committed an error in assessing the evidence so flagrant as

-3- to cause gross injustice.” W. Baptist Hospital v. Kelly, 827 S.W.2d 685, 687-88

(Ky. 1992). Our review proceeds accordingly.

Murray Energy contends that the Board erred in affirming the ALJ’s

decision that Murray Energy was responsible for payment of PPD benefits to

Smith as a result of the work-related cumulative trauma injuries. Murray Energy

maintains that the parties stipulated the date of Smith’s cumulative trauma injuries

to be December 27, 2019, Smith’s last day of employment with Muhlenberg Coal.

Murray Energy claims that this stipulated date of injury (December 27, 2019)

“controls for purposes of assignment of liability” between it and Muhlenberg Coal.

Murray Energy Brief at 10. At the time of the stipulated date of injury (December

27, 2019), Murray Energy argues that Smith was employed by Muhlenberg Coal,

and as such, Muhlenberg Coal is the liable employer. Murray Energy also argues

that the ALJ was bound by the parties’ stipulated date of injury and improperly

ignored the stipulation.

From a review of the record, it does appear that the parties did

stipulate that Smith sustained the cumulative trauma injuries on December 27,

2019; however, it is equally clear that the parties also stipulated that the

manifestation date was a contested issue.

When an employee has been employed by multiple employers and has

alleged a cumulative trauma injury, the employer on the date of manifestation of

-4- such injury is solely liable for workers’ compensation benefits. Hale v. CDR

Operations, Inc., 474 S.W.3d 129, 138 (Ky. 2015).2

In this case, the parties clearly listed the manifestation date as a

contested issue in the stipulations. And, in cumulative trauma injuries with

multiple employers, the employer on the date of manifestation of such injury is

liable for payment of workers’ compensation benefits. Id. Thus, the ALJ was free

to determine that the manifestation date of Smith’s cumulative trauma injuries

occurred during his employment with Murray Energy and that Murray Energy was

solely responsible for payment of workers’ compensation benefits, which occurred

in this case. We find no error in the Board’s thorough analysis of this issue.

Board’s Opinion at 14-16.

Accordingly, we cannot conclude that the Board overlooked or

misconstrued controlling law or erred in assessing the evidence so as to constitute

gross injustice. W. Baptist Hospital, 827 S.W.2d at 687-88.

For the foregoing reasons, the opinion and order of the Workers’

Compensation Board affirming the administrative law judge’s award of permanent

partial disability benefits is affirmed.

2 While not authoritative, we note the Kentucky Supreme Court’s decision in Papineau v. Trans Ash Inc., No. 2020-SC-0296-WC, 2021 WL 2617124 (June 17, 2021). Therein, the Supreme Court observed “when an employee alleging a work-related cumulative trauma injury had worked for multiple employers, the employer on the date of manifestation of the injury bears the full burden of paying workers’ compensation benefits[.]” Papineau v. Trans Ash Inc., No. 2020- SC-0296-WC, 2021 WL 2617124 at *12 (June 17, 2021).

-5- ALL CONCUR.

BRIEF FOR APPELLANT: BRIEF FOR APPELLEE MUHLENBERG COUNTY COAL: Allison M. Helsinger S. Nathan Goens Donald J. Niehaus Lexington, Kentucky Lexington, Kentucky

BRIEF FOR APPELLEE MARK SMITH:

McKinnley Morgan J. Casey Smith Paducah, Kentucky

-6-