Senser v. Minnesota Vikings Football

474 N.W.2d 312, 1991 Minn. LEXIS 207, 1991 WL 155111
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedAugust 16, 1991
DocketNo. C4-91-868
StatusPublished

This text of 474 N.W.2d 312 (Senser v. Minnesota Vikings Football) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Senser v. Minnesota Vikings Football, 474 N.W.2d 312, 1991 Minn. LEXIS 207, 1991 WL 155111 (Mich. 1991).

Opinion

TOMLJANOVICH, Justice.

The Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals reversed a compensation judge’s determination that the employer had not filed a valid application for retroactive registration under the second injury law. We reverse and reinstate the decision of the compensation judge.

The facts on which the Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals’ decision rests, briefly stated, are as follows:

Joseph M. Senser, a professional athlete employed by the Minnesota Vikings Football Club, sustained a right knee injury during a home game against the Green Bay Packers on November 29, 1981; and on December 14, 1984, the employee reinjured his right knee during a practice session. This injury was reported to the team trainer and also to the team physician. In July 1985, the employee retired from football because of his right knee disability; and in March 1986, the employee underwent proximal tibial osteotomy surgery because of persisting right knee problems.

In May 1987, the employee filed a claim petition against the Vikings alleging knee [313]*313injuries on November 29, 1981, and December 14, 1984.1 On July 7, 1987, the employer filed an application for retroactive registration of the employee’s 1981 injury with the Special Compensation Fund under the 1984 second injury law, Minn.Stat. § 176.-131, sub. 3(b) (1984), a provision that had been repealed effective August 1, 1986. 1986 Minn. Laws, ch. 461, §§ 18 and 19.

The compensation judge determined the employer had not filed a valid retroactive registration within 180 days of notice of the injury where the employer had notice of the injury as early as December 14, 1984, and no later than March 1986. On appeal, the Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals reversed, concluding the employer did not have notice of the December 1984 injury until the employee filed his claim petition in 1987. By writ of certiora-ri, the Special Compensation Fund sought reversal of the registration determination.

The Minnesota Second Injury Law provides for reimbursement to employers of compensation paid for an injury made substantially greater because of a preexisting physical impairment. One of the basic requirements for reimbursement is the registration of the physical impairment; and the registration provision in effect on the date of the employee’s 1984 injury allowed for post-second-injury registration so long as it was accomplished within 180 days after the employer received notice of the injury.2 The requirements of post-injury registration are mandatory and unambiguous. Dorman v. Jennie-O-Foods, 380 N.W.2d 490 (Minn.1986).

The Special Compensation Fund argues that where there was evidence the employee promptly reported the second injury to his employer on December 14, 1984, and that the team doctor as well as the business manager were fully aware of the employee’s knee condition and need for further surgery in March 1986, the Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals should have affirmed the finding that the registration application, filed in July 1987, was not valid. We agree the registration in this case was not accomplished within 180 days after notice of injury. Accordingly, we reverse the decision of the Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals and reinstate the compensation judge’s finding pertaining to the registration application.3

Reversed.

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

Related

Schreiner v. C.S. McCrossan, Inc.
465 N.W.2d 917 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1991)
Dorman v. Jennie-O-Foods
380 N.W.2d 490 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1986)
Gillette v. Harold, Inc.
101 N.W.2d 200 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1960)
Amberg v. Olivia Nursing Home
236 N.W.2d 785 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
474 N.W.2d 312, 1991 Minn. LEXIS 207, 1991 WL 155111, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/senser-v-minnesota-vikings-football-minn-1991.