Title: PINION v H C SMITH CONSTRUCTION C

State: montana

Issuer: Montana Supreme Court

Document:

No. 80-65 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 1980 LESTER E. PINION, Claimant and Respondent, -vs- H. C. SlMITH CONSTRUCTION CO., Employer, and ARGONAUT INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant and Appellant. Appeal from: Workers' Compensation Court, The Honorable William E. Hunt, Judge presiding. Counsel of Record : For Appellant: Harris and Grant, Helena, Montana For Respondent: Tom L. Lewis, Great Falls, Montana Submitted on Briefs: June 25, 1980 Decided : AU G 6 - 1980 Filed : AUGf-:; - $334 M r . J u s t i c e Gene B. Daly delivered t h e Opinion of t h e Court. The employer and i n s u r e r bring t h i s appeal from an order of t h e Workers' Compensation Court upholding a deci- sion of t h e Workers' Compensation Division which granted claimant a waiver of t h e one-year period f o r f i l i n g a claim f o r compensation under s e c t i o n 39-71-601(2), MCA. The i s s u e i n t h i s case i s based s o l e l y on testimony of claimant and h i s wife before the Administrator of t h e Divi- sion of Workers' Compensation. Claimant Lester E. Pinion, employed a s an i r o n worker by H. C. Smith Construction Company, w a s injured on t h e job a t t h e end of h i s s h i f t on May 31, 1978, when he stepped i n t o a hole hurting h i s knee and back. Shortly a f t e r the accident he o r a l l y reported it t o h i s supervisors, who on June 2, 1978, f i l e d a w r i t t e n r e p o r t on a form supplied by appellant insurance company, d e t a i l i n g t h e accident. Although h i s knee and back w e r e sore, claimant continued t o work f o r H. C. Smith Construc- t i o n f o r two months u n t i l J u l y 31, 1978, when he q u i t and took a supervisory p o s i t i o n with another company on an out-of-state job which l a s t e d eleven months, During t h a t thirteen-month period claimant and h i s wife t r e a t e d t h e i n j u r y b u t d i d not see a doctor o r f i l e a compensation c l a i m because they thought t h e i n j u r y would go away, he condition progressively worsened, and claimant w a s compelled t o seek medical a s s i s t a n c e when he returned t o Montana. I n August 1979 claimant was examined by an orthopedic sur- geon who recommended a knee operation, which has s i n c e been performed. Pinion, unable t o earn wages, f i l e d a claim with t h e Workers' Compensation Division on September 17, 1979. The s o l e i s s u e on appeal i s whether t h e order of t h e Workers' Compensation Division waiving t h e one-year s t a t u t e of l i m i t a t i o n s f o r f i l i n g a claim f o r compensation, as authorized by s e c t i o n 39-71-601(2), MCA, i s supported by s u b s t a n t i a l evidence. Section 39-71-601 ( 2 ) , MCA, states: "The d i v i s i o n may, upon a reasonable showing by t h e claimant of lack of knowledge of d i s - a b i l i t y , waive t h e time requirement up t o an a d d i t i o n a l 24 months. " I n accordance with s e c t i o n 39-71-104, MCA, t h e Workers' Compensation Act has always been l i b e r a l l y construed i n favor of t h e i n j u r e d claimant. Rumsey v. Cardinal Petroleum (1975), 166 Mont. 17, 530 P.2d 433; S t a t e ex rel. Romero v. District Court of Eighth J . D . (1973), 162 Mont. 358, 513 P. 2d 265; N e s s v. Diamond Asphalt Company (1964) , 143 Mont. 560, 393 P.2d 43. This Court i n W i l l i a m s v. Wellman-Power & Gas, Inc. (1977), - Mont. , 571 P.2d 90, 34 St.Rep. 1232, extended t h e r u l e of l i b e r a l c o n s t r u c t i o n t o t h e above-mentioned 1973 amendment. I n Dumont v. Wickens Bros. Const. Co. (1979), - Mont. , 598 P.2d 1099, 1106, 36 St.Rep. 1471, w e held t h a t t h e - scope of review of a d e c i s i o n of t h e Workers' Compensation Court upon appeal has been s t a t e d many t i m e s . The r u l e i s well summarized i n Jensen v. Zook Bros. Const. Co. (1978), Mont. , 582 P.2d 1191, 1193, 35 St.Rep. 1066, 1068, - i n t h e following language: "The standard of review a p p l i c a b l e i n deter- mining t h e s u f f i c i e n c y of t h e evidence t o support t h e f i n d i n g s of t h e Workers' Compen- s a t i o n Court has been s t a t e d i n t h e following language: "'Our function i n reviewing a d e c i s i o n of t h e Workers' Compensation Court i s t o determine whether t h e r e i s s u b s t a n t i a l evidence t o sup- p o r t t h e f i n d i n g s and conclusions of t h a t c o u r t . W e cannot s u b s t i t u t e our judgment f o r t h a t of t h e t r i a l c o u r t a s t o t h e weight of evidence on questions of f a c t . Where t h e r e i s s u b s t a n t i a l evidence t o support t h e f i n d i n g s of t h e Workers ' Compensation Court, t h i s Court cannot overturn t h e d e c i s i o n . ' S t e f f e s v. 93 Leasing Co., Inc. (U.S.F.&G) (1978), Mont., 580 P.2d 450, 452, 35 St.Rep. 816, 818." There a l s o e x i s t s a presumption of c o r r e c t n e s s f o r f i n d i n g s of f a c t and conclusions of law of t h e Workers' Com- pensation Division, i f supported by c r e d i b l e evidence, and t h e burden of proof i s upon t h e p a r t y a t t a c k i n g them t o show t h a t they w e r e c l e a r l y erroneous. E r h a r t v. Great Western Sugar Co. (1976), 169 Mont. 375, 546 P.2d 1055; P a r t o l l v. Anaconda Copper Mining Co. (1949), 122 Mont. 305, 203 P.2d There is s u b s t a n t i a l c r e d i b l e evidence i n t h e record t o support both t h e d e c i s i o n of t h e Administrator and t h e d e c i s i o n of t h e Workers' Compensation Court t h a t , " t h e r e has been a reasonable showing by t h e claimant of lack of knowl- edge of d i s a b i l i t y . " Appellant has n o t m e t i t s burden of proof, and t h e d e c i s i o n of t h e Administrator, a s affirmed by t h e Workers' Compensation Court, i s affirmed. W e concur: % ~ \ ( ! M ~ - Q Q Q Chief J u s t i c e