The Workers’ Compensation Department of Bowles Rice McDavid Graff & Love LLP

In a case decided on July 1, 2004, the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals interpreted the effective date for workers’ compensation reforms passed exactly one year earlier in Senate Bill 2013. In previous decisions, the court had significantly delayed reforms passed by prior Legislatures by holding that changes in workers’ compensation laws were only effective for work-related injuries that occurred after the effective date of the Legislature’s reforms. However, in this decision the Court held that the 2003 Legislature made it clear the new law should apply to all orders of the Workers’ Compensation Commission entered on or after July 1, 2003. Thus, many of the positive reforms in Senate Bill 2013 will not be delayed, saving an estimated $1.1 billion in additional workers’ compensation liability.

The decision of the Court actually addressed three cases. In the primary case, Thompson v. Burton, the claimant argued his workers’ compensation benefits for permanent disability should be calculated under higher benefit rates in effect before Senate Bill 2013 because his injury occurred before the effective date of the statute. However, the Court held that the Commission’s order which granted the permanent disability benefits was entered after July 1, 2003, so the lower benefit rates in Senate Bill 2013 should be applied.

In the second case addressed by the Court, Yoakum v. Burton, the Court not only addressed the benefit rate issue, but also addressed the reforms in Senate Bill 2013 which eliminated automatic 5% awards in occupational pneumoconiosis claims in which there was X-ray evidence of lung disease with no impairment in the claimant’s breathing. The Court held that orders of the Commission entered after July 1, 2003, had to apply the new provisions of Senate Bill 2013 which eliminated these automatic 5% occupational pneumoconiosis awards, even if the claim was filed based upon a date of injury or exposure before Senate Bill 2013 was passed.

Thus, the Court held in the Thompson and Yoakum cases that workers’ compensation laws passed by the Legislature must be strictly applied unless they are found to be unconstitutional “beyond a reasonable doubt”. This high deference to the Legislature and to the Commission in applying workers’ compensation reforms will result in substantial savings to the Workers’ Compensation Fund and to West Virginia employers.

There were two findings by the Court which were less favorable for employers. In a discussion of administrative delays, the Court suggested there could be future claims in which the provisions of Senate Bill 2013 may not apply if Commission orders entered after the effective date of the statute should actually have predated the passage of the statute because the Commission violated time limits contained in workers’ compensation regulations. In addition, the employer in the third case addressed by the Court, Wampler Foods, Inc. v. Workers’ Compensation Division, requested that the reforms in Senate Bill 2013 be applied not only to awards entered by the Commission on or after July 1, 2003, but also to claims still in litigation on orders entered before the statute was passed.

Senate Bill 2013 abolished the former definition of the “rule of liberality” which often awarded claimants the highest awards and most liberal interpretation of the evidence, even if that liberal evidence was clearly outweighed by evidence of lower or more conservative awards. The Legislature also adopted more stringent appeal standards in Senate Bill 2013. Even though the Commission’s order predated Senate Bill 2013, the employer Wampler Foods (now Pilgrim’s Pride Corporation) argued that these two provisions of the new law should be applied by the Court on appeal based upon the language in the statute.

The Court’s decision in Wampler not to apply Senate Bill 2013 to cases currently in litigation on orders entered before the effective date of the statute will delay some of the positive impact of the law. Other issues related to the application of Senate Bill 2013 were not addressed and may be the subject of future litigation. However, the decisions in these three cases, Thompson, Yoakum, and Wampler, to strictly apply the new law to all orders entered on or after July 1, 2003, will accelerate desperately needed reforms in the system.

Bowles Rice was privileged to have argued this case before the Court along with the Workers’ Compensation Commission. Feel free to contact one of the Workers’ Compensation attorneys at Bowles Rice if we can assist you with questions you have about the many changes in the system that are affecting your workers’ compensation claims.

The author presents these materials with the understanding that the information provided is not legal advice. Due to the rapidly changing nature of the law, information contained in this publication may become outdated. Anyone using these materials should always research original sources of authority and update this information to ensure accuracy when dealing with a specific matter. No person should act or rely upon the information contained in this publication without seeking the advice of an attorney.