Question Submitted by: The Honorable Chris Kannad, Oklahoma House of Representatives District 91

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports

Question Submitted by: The Honorable Chris Kannad, Oklahoma House of Representatives District 91

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports·Decided September 9, 2026·Published

Opinion

OSCN Found Document:Question Submitted by: The Honorable Chris Kannad, Oklahoma House of Representatives District 91

Question Submitted by: The Honorable Chris Kannad, Oklahoma House of Representatives District 91
2026 OK AG 14
Decided: 09/09/2026
OKLAHOMA ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION

Cite as: 2026 OK AG 14, __ P.3d __

ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION

¶0 This office has received your request for an Attorney General Opinion in which you ask, in effect, the following question:

What are the "annual obligations" of the Multiple Injury Trust Fund under title 85A, section 31(A)(1) of the Oklahoma Statutes?

I.

Summary

¶1 The Multiple Injury Trust Fund ("MITF" or "Fund") was created by the Legislature for a single purpose: "to insulate employers from having to pay permanent total disability benefits to a previously impaired worker who suffers an additional work-related injury which prevents the worker from returning to any gainful employment." Multiple Inj. Tr. Fund v. Sugg, 2015 OK 78362 P.3d 22285A O.S.2021, § 31Id.

¶2 While the Act has no standalone definition for "annual obligations," it lists the Fund's various liabilities and spending responsibilities. Those liabilities and responsibilities comprise the annual obligations of the MITF: permanent total disability awards (plus accumulating interest) and any reasonably projected compromise settlements of those awards, along with the Fund's annual payment to the Oklahoma Department of Labor, authorized reinsurance agreements, outstanding loan installments, any unpaid obligations carried forward from previous years, and all administrative expenses incurred by the Fund.

II.

Background

¶3 In 1943, the Legislature created the Fund "to encourage employment of previously impaired workers." Special Indem. Fund v. Figgins, 1992 OK 59831 P.2d 1379Id. ¶ 5, 831 P.2d at 1381. The Fund provides a safety net to already-injured workers while simultaneously shielding employers if a new injury, combined with the preexisting disability, renders those workers permanently and totally disabled in the course of their employment. See Multiple Inj. Tr. Fund v. Wade, 2008 OK 15180 P.3d 1205Ball v. Multiple Inj. Tr. Fund, 2015 OK 64360 P.3d 499Figgins, 1992 OK 59

¶4 The MITF is funded by a regular assessment computed according to a process set forth in the Act. See 85A O.S.2021, § 31Id. § 31(A)(1). Based on that determination, the Commission "establish[es] an assessment rate . . . necessary to pay the annual obligations . . . for the next calendar year." Id. All "[i]nsurance carriers, self-insurers, and group self-insurance associations" in the state pay a proportional amount of the assessment in equal installments. Id. § 31(A)(2). The assessment may not exceed seven percent (7%) of (1) an insurer's "gross direct written [policy] premiums," (2) "the total actual paid losses" of an employer carrying its own risk, or (3) "the normal premium" for a group self-insurance association. Id. § 31(A)(5)(a)--(c). Under current law, the "authorization for a maximum seven-percent assessment shall exist until fiscal year 2027, then revert back to six percent (6%) thereafter." Id.

III.

Discussion

¶5 You ask for the definition of the Fund's "annual obligations" as the term is used in this section of the Act. Simply put, these obligations represent the lawful and necessary expenditures that the MITF Director--acting within the scope of that office's valid statutory discretion--projects for the upcoming calendar year. Toward this end, various provisions of the Act authorize the Fund to expend money for enumerated purposes.

¶6 In particular, the applicable portions of the Act empower and instruct the MITF to make several types of payments:

"sufficient funds for administration expenses" approved by the MITF Director, id. § 31(S).

adjudicated awards to claimants for permanent total disability, 85A O.S.2021, § 32
approved settlements in compromise of such claims, id. § 32(G)--(H);
simple interest accumulating on the Fund's "accrued and unpaid" awards, id. § 31(T);
an annual payment of $1,000,000 to the Oklahoma Department of Labor Revolving Fund, id. § 31(I);
obligations related to reinsurance agreements, id. § 31(N);
certain loan installments, id. § 31(F)(2);
unpaid obligations carried forward from prior-year revenue shortfalls, id. § 31(A)(8); and

¶7 In short, the Legislature has furnished a complete roster of the Fund's fiscal liabilities and responsibilities. Accordingly, the total amount of projected spending in these enumerated categories will constitute the Fund's annual obligations in a given year. See, e.g., Humphries v. Lewis, 2003 OK 1267 P.3d 333

¶8 The Fund's primary annual obligation, by far, arises from permanent total disability awards. Reynolds v. Special Indem. Fund, 1986 OK 64725 P.2d 126585A O.S.2021, § 32Id. § 32(C); see also Wade, 2008 OK 15

¶9 In seeking a comprehensive and precise definition of the Fund's "annual obligations," you also specifically ask whether compromise settlements of existing awards and claims are included as a statutory obligation of the MITF. The answer is yes. In the past, "the Fund has had a continuing problem with the timely payment of awards due to lack of funds[.]" Dean v. Multiple Inj. Tr. Fund, 2006 OK 78145 P.3d 1097Id.; see also 2019 Okla. Sess. Laws ch. 476, § 58 (expressing legislative purpose "to secure the [Fund] as a general obligation of the State of Oklahoma").

¶10 With the aim of more efficiently resolving the Fund's liabilities arising from both adjudicated awards and pending claims, the Legislature provided that the MITF "shall have authority to compromise a claim for less than the indicated amount of permanent total disability." 85A ¶11O.S.2021, § 32(G) (emphasis added). Section 32(G) further directs that all "[o]rders shall be paid in periodic installments beginning on the date of the award, unless commuted to a lump-sum payment or payments, by agreement of the claimant and the [MITF]." Id.; see also id. § 32(H) (establishing additional procedures governing the Fund's payment of agreed settlements). A plain reading of sections 31 and 32 together makes it evident that the MITF Director may fully consider reasonable projections of anticipated settlements when computing the Fund's annual obligations. See Special Indem. Fund v. Treadwell, 1984 OK 91693 P.2d 60885A O.S.2021, § 31see also id. § 31(M) ("The MITF Director shall have authority to fulfill all payment obligations of the [Fund].").

¶11 In effect, sections 31 and 32 channel the MITF Director's discretion and maximize the effect of specific, enumerated categories in guiding the MITF Director's computation.

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

OSCN Found Document:Question Submitted by: The Honorable Chris Kannad, Oklahoma House of Representatives District 91

Question Submitted by: The Honorable Chris Kannad, Oklahoma House of Representatives District 91
2026 OK AG 14
Decided: 09/09/2026
OKLAHOMA ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION

Cite as: 2026 OK AG 14, __ P.3d __

ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION

¶0 This office has received your request for an Attorney General Opinion in which you ask, in effect, the following question:

What are the "annual obligations" of the Multiple Injury Trust Fund under title 85A, section 31(A)(1) of the Oklahoma Statutes?

I.

Summary

¶1 The Multiple Injury Trust Fund ("MITF" or "Fund") was created by the Legislature for a single purpose: "to insulate employers from having to pay permanent total disability benefits to a previously impaired worker who suffers an additional work-related injury which prevents the worker from returning to any gainful employment." Multiple Inj. Tr. Fund v. Sugg, 2015 OK 78362 P.3d 22285A O.S.2021, § 31Id.

¶2 While the Act has no standalone definition for "annual obligations," it lists the Fund's various liabilities and spending responsibilities. Those liabilities and responsibilities comprise the annual obligations of the MITF: permanent total disability awards (plus accumulating interest) and any reasonably projected compromise settlements of those awards, along with the Fund's annual payment to the Oklahoma Department of Labor, authorized reinsurance agreements, outstanding loan installments, any unpaid obligations carried forward from previous years, and all administrative expenses incurred by the Fund.

II.

Background

¶3 In 1943, the Legislature created the Fund "to encourage employment of previously impaired workers." Special Indem. Fund v. Figgins, 1992 OK 59831 P.2d 1379Id. ¶ 5, 831 P.2d at 1381. The Fund provides a safety net to already-injured workers while simultaneously shielding employers if a new injury, combined with the preexisting disability, renders those workers permanently and totally disabled in the course of their employment. See Multiple Inj. Tr. Fund v. Wade, 2008 OK 15180 P.3d 1205Ball v. Multiple Inj. Tr. Fund, 2015 OK 64360 P.3d 499Figgins, 1992 OK 59

¶4 The MITF is funded by a regular assessment computed according to a process set forth in the Act. See 85A O.S.2021, § 31Id. § 31(A)(1). Based on that determination, the Commission "establish[es] an assessment rate . . . necessary to pay the annual obligations . . . for the next calendar year." Id. All "[i]nsurance carriers, self-insurers, and group self-insurance associations" in the state pay a proportional amount of the assessment in equal installments. Id. § 31(A)(2). The assessment may not exceed seven percent (7%) of (1) an insurer's "gross direct written [policy] premiums," (2) "the total actual paid losses" of an employer carrying its own risk, or (3) "the normal premium" for a group self-insurance association. Id. § 31(A)(5)(a)--(c). Under current law, the "authorization for a maximum seven-percent assessment shall exist until fiscal year 2027, then revert back to six percent (6%) thereafter." Id.

III.

Discussion

¶5 You ask for the definition of the Fund's "annual obligations" as the term is used in this section of the Act. Simply put, these obligations represent the lawful and necessary expenditures that the MITF Director--acting within the scope of that office's valid statutory discretion--projects for the upcoming calendar year. Toward this end, various provisions of the Act authorize the Fund to expend money for enumerated purposes.

¶6 In particular, the applicable portions of the Act empower and instruct the MITF to make several types of payments:

"sufficient funds for administration expenses" approved by the MITF Director, id. § 31(S).

adjudicated awards to claimants for permanent total disability, 85A O.S.2021, § 32
approved settlements in compromise of such claims, id. § 32(G)--(H);
simple interest accumulating on the Fund's "accrued and unpaid" awards, id. § 31(T);
an annual payment of $1,000,000 to the Oklahoma Department of Labor Revolving Fund, id. § 31(I);
obligations related to reinsurance agreements, id. § 31(N);
certain loan installments, id. § 31(F)(2);
unpaid obligations carried forward from prior-year revenue shortfalls, id. § 31(A)(8); and

¶7 In short, the Legislature has furnished a complete roster of the Fund's fiscal liabilities and responsibilities. Accordingly, the total amount of projected spending in these enumerated categories will constitute the Fund's annual obligations in a given year. See, e.g., Humphries v. Lewis, 2003 OK 1267 P.3d 333

¶8 The Fund's primary annual obligation, by far, arises from permanent total disability awards. Reynolds v. Special Indem. Fund, 1986 OK 64725 P.2d 126585A O.S.2021, § 32Id. § 32(C); see also Wade, 2008 OK 15

¶9 In seeking a comprehensive and precise definition of the Fund's "annual obligations," you also specifically ask whether compromise settlements of existing awards and claims are included as a statutory obligation of the MITF. The answer is yes. In the past, "the Fund has had a continuing problem with the timely payment of awards due to lack of funds[.]" Dean v. Multiple Inj. Tr. Fund, 2006 OK 78145 P.3d 1097Id.; see also 2019 Okla. Sess. Laws ch. 476, § 58 (expressing legislative purpose "to secure the [Fund] as a general obligation of the State of Oklahoma").

¶10 With the aim of more efficiently resolving the Fund's liabilities arising from both adjudicated awards and pending claims, the Legislature provided that the MITF "shall have authority to compromise a claim for less than the indicated amount of permanent total disability." 85A ¶11O.S.2021, § 32(G) (emphasis added). Section 32(G) further directs that all "[o]rders shall be paid in periodic installments beginning on the date of the award, unless commuted to a lump-sum payment or payments, by agreement of the claimant and the [MITF]." Id.; see also id. § 32(H) (establishing additional procedures governing the Fund's payment of agreed settlements). A plain reading of sections 31 and 32 together makes it evident that the MITF Director may fully consider reasonable projections of anticipated settlements when computing the Fund's annual obligations. See Special Indem. Fund v. Treadwell, 1984 OK 91693 P.2d 60885A O.S.2021, § 31see also id. § 31(M) ("The MITF Director shall have authority to fulfill all payment obligations of the [Fund].").

¶11 In effect, sections 31 and 32 channel the MITF Director's discretion and maximize the effect of specific, enumerated categories in guiding the MITF Director's computation. As a fundamental matter, a "statute creating an express power in the nature of an express affirmative duty normally creates an implied power necessary to fulfill that express affirmative duty." W. Heights Indep. Sch. Dist. No. I-41 v. State ex rel. Okla. State. Dep't of Educ., 2022 OK 79518 P.3d 531see also ANTONIN SCALIA & BRYAN A. GARNER, READING LAW: THE INTERPRETATION OF LEGAL TEXTS 192--93 (2012) ("In the context of legislation, it has long been held that 'whenever a power is given by a statute, everything necessary to making it effectual . . . is implied.'" (citation omitted)). Here, the Act authorizes a funding mechanism--an assessment based on the MITF Director's determination of annual obligations--and identifies certain enumerated expenditures for the Fund. See Cont'l Oil Co. v. Okla. State Bd. of Equalization, 1976 OK 23570 P.2d 315see also Gundy v. United States, 588 U.S. 128, 136 (2019) (explaining that courts will construe statutes to determine "what task [the statute] delegates and what instructions it provides").

¶12 In sum, the MITF Director's power to determine annual obligations is directly tied to the purposes for which the Fund's revenue may be spent. This office concludes that the MITF Director shall determine the Fund's annual obligations based on a reasonably expected projection of all foreseeable annual spending within the designated categories established under title 85A, sections 31 and 32.

¶13 It is, therefore, the official Opinion of the Attorney General that:

The "annual obligations" of the Multiple Injury Trust Fund are the spending categories enumerated within title 85A, sections 31 and 32 of the Oklahoma Statutes: permanent total disability awards, compromise settlements of such awards, and all other authorized expenses and liabilities, as determined by the MITF Director's reasonable fiscal forecast for the upcoming calendar year.

GENTNER DRUMMOND

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF OKLAHOMA

CULLEN D. SWEENEY

ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL

FOOTNOTES

Ball v. Multiple Inj. Tr. Fund, 2015 OK 64360 P.3d 499

68 O.S.2021, § 6101

85A O.S.Supp.2026, § 2see also Sugg, 2015 OK 78

Question Submitted by: The Honorable Chris Kannad, Oklahoma House of Representatives District 91, (Okla. Super. Ct. 2026).

Pincite

Question Submitted by: The Honorable Chris Kannad, Oklahoma House of Representatives District 91 (Question Submitted by: The Honorable Chris Kannad, Oklahoma House of Representatives District 91) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

I.

II.

III.

Related