Special Disability Trust Fund v. Stephens

595 So. 2d 206, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 1857
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedFebruary 27, 1992
DocketNos. 90-2791, 91-1231
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 595 So. 2d 206 (Special Disability Trust Fund v. Stephens) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Special Disability Trust Fund v. Stephens, 595 So. 2d 206, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 1857 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The Special Disability Trust Fund (Fund) challenges workers’ compensation orders awarding the employer/carriers reimbursement from the Fund for supplemental permanent total disability benefits paid pursuant to section 440.15(l)(e)l, Florida Statutes (Supp.1984). The two cases involve the same issue and were consolidated for appeal. We affirm.

The claimant in case number 90-2791 sustained a compensable injury on October 18, 1984. The claimant in case number 91-1231 sustained a compensable injury on September 11, 1984. The claimant in each case continues to receive permanent total disability benefits as a result of the 1984 accidents. Because the employees sustained compensable injuries subsequent to July 1, 1984, the employer/carriers have also paid supplemental permanent total disability benefits pursuant to section 440.-15(l)(e)l, Florida Statutes (Supp.1984).

Because each of the claimants suffered from a permanent physical impairment which preexisted the 1984 accidents, the employer/carriers made a claim for reimbursement from the Special Disability Trust Fund pursuant to section 440.49(2), Florida Statutes (1983). Although the Fund has reimbursed the employer/carriers for permanent total disability benefit payments paid pursuant to section 440.-15(l)(a), the Fund denied the requests for reimbursement of supplemental permanent total disability benefits paid pursuant to section 440.15(l)(e)l.

The only issue to be decided is whether the employer/carriers’ entitlement to reimbursement for permanent total benefits pursuant to section 440.49(2)(c) includes reimbursement for the additional supplemental permanent total disability benefits required to be paid under section 440.-15(l)(e)l. In each case, the judge of compensation claims found that the Fund was required to reimburse the employer/carrier for supplemental permanent total disability benefits paid. We agree.

Section 440.15(l)(e)l, Florida Statutes (Supp.1984), provides:

440.15 Compensation for disability.— Compensation for disability shall be paid to the employee, subject to the limits provided in s. 440.12(2), as follows:
(1) PERMANENT TOTAL DISABILITY.—
(a) In case of total disability adjudged to be permanent, 66 2/3 percent of the average weekly wages shall be paid to the employee during the continuance of such total disability.
[[Image here]]
(e) In case of permanent total disability resulting from injuries which occurred subsequent to June 30, 1955, and for which the liability of the employer for compensation has not been discharged under the provisions of s. 440.20(12), the injured employee shall receive additional weekly compensation benefits equal to 5 percent of his weekly compensation rate, as established pursuant to the law in effect on the date of his injury, multiplied by the number of calendar years [208]*208since the date of injury_ These supplemental benefits shall be paid by the division out of the Workers’ Compensation Administration Trust Fund when the injury occurred subsequent to June 30, 1955, and before July 1, 1984. These supplemental benefits shall be paid by the employer when the injury occurred on or after July 1, 1984.

(Emphasis added). Section 440.49(2), Florida Statutes (1983), provides in pertinent part:

(2) LIMITATION OF LIABILITY FOR SUBSEQUENT INJURY THROUGH SPECIAL DISABILITY TRUST FUND.—
(a) Legislative intent. — It is the purpose of this subsection to encourage the employment of the physically handicapped by protecting employers from excess liability for compensation and medical expense when an injury to a handicapped worker merges with his preexisting permanent physical impairment to cause a greater disability, permanent impairment, or wage loss than would have resulted from the injury alone. The division shall inform all employers of the existence and function of the fund and shall interpret eligibility requirements liberally....
[[Image here]]
(c) Permanent impairment, wage loss, or permanent total disability after other physical impairment.—
[[Image here]]
3. Permanent total disability. — If an employee who has a preexisting permanent physical impairment incurs a subsequent permanent impairment from injury or occupational disease arising out of, and in the course of, his employment which merges with the preexisting permanent physical impairment to cause permanent total disability, the employer shall, in the first instance, pay all benefits provided by this chapter; but, subject to the limitations specified in paragraph (f), such employer shall be reimbursed from the Special Disability Trust Fund created by paragraph (h) for all compensation for permanent total disability which is in excess of the first 175 weeks of permanent total disability compensation. ...

The Fund argues that it has the authority to reimburse only in those situations specifically identified by the legislature. The Fund contends that supplemental permanent total disability benefits are separate and distinct benefits and there is no reference to supplemental permanent total disability benefits in section 440.49(2)(c). The Fund also contends that no corresponding change was made in the provisions of the reimbursement statute when section 440.15(l)(e)l was amended in 1984 to require the employer/carrier to pay supplemental permanent total disability benefits. The Fund cites Special Disability Trust Fund v. Motor and Compressor Company, 446 So.2d 224 (Fla.1st DCA 1984), for the proposition that merely because the legislature amends a provision to require the employer/carrier to provide a benefit does not mean that the provisions of section 440.49(2) should be construed to provide for reimbursement to the employer/carrier. The Fund’s arguments are not persuasive.

The Fund’s reliance upon Motor and Compressor Company is misplaced. In that case, the Fund argued that vocational rehabilitation benefits were not among those benefits for which reimbursement could be ordered under section 440.49(2). The portion of the statute at issue provided for reimbursable benefits specified as “remedial treatment, care, and attendance pursuant to s. 440.13.” Section 440.13 required the employer to furnish remedial treatment, care, and attendance under the direction and supervision of a qualified physician or surgeon. The decision recognized that “simply because the legislature amended section 440.49(1) to require the employer/carrier to provide such benefits does not mean that the reimbursement provisions of section 440.49(2)(e) should be construed to provide for reimbursement to the employer/carrier for payment of vocational benefits where the language of the latter section was not amended but continued to read ‘remedial treatment, care, and attend-[209]*209anee pursuant to s. 440.13/ ” In contrast to the present situation, the employer’s new burden of paying for vocational rehabilitation was clearly not included as one of the benefits for which the employer could be reimbursed.

Section 440.49(2)(c)3 provides that the employer of an employee who has a preexisting permanent physical impairment “shall be reimbursed from the Special Disability Trust Fund created by paragraph (h) for all compensation

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

Related

Hillsborough County School Board v. Special Disability Trust Fund
596 So. 2d 483 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
595 So. 2d 206, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 1857, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/special-disability-trust-fund-v-stephens-fladistctapp-1992.