Title: Kraby v. Vermont Telephone Co.

State: vermont

Issuer: Vermont Supreme Court

Document:

Kraby v. Vermont Telephone Co. (2004-004); 177 Vt. 614; 868 A.2d 689

2004 VT 120

[Filed 14-Dec-2004]

                                 ENTRY ORDER

                                 2004 VT 120

                      SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 2004-004

                             OCTOBER TERM, 2004

  Paul Kraby                    }     APPEALED FROM:
                                }
                                }
       v.                       }     Commissioner of Labor and Industry
                                }     
  Vermont Telephone Company     }
                                }     DOCKET NO. 44-03 WC

       In the above-entitled cause, the Clerk will enter:

       ¶  1.     Employer Vermont Telephone Company appeals from a ruling of 
  the Commissioner of the Department of Labor and Industry that the statute
  of limitations does not bar claimant Paul Kraby from seeking partial
  permanent disability benefits for his work related injury.  Employer
  contends the Commissioner erred in finding that, for purposes of triggering
  the six-year statute of limitations, claimant's date of injury was the date
  of his medical end result.  We affirm.

       ¶  2.     The undisputed material facts may be briefly summarized.  On
  May 12, 1995, claimant injured his knee while climbing a telephone pole in
  the course of his employment.  Claimant underwent surgery on June 27, 1995,
  and had post-operative visits with the surgeon in July and August of that
  year.  He filed a timely workers' compensation claim, and received
  temporary disability benefits until July 10, 1995. 

        
       ¶  3.     On August 8, 2001, claimant filed a notice and application
  for permanent disability benefits for injuries arising from the accident. 
  Employer's workers' compensation carrier denied the claim on the ground
  that it was filed more than six years after the date of injury, and was
  therefore untimely under 21 V.S.A. § 660(a), which provides that
  "[p]roceedings to initiate a claim for benefits under this chapter may not
  be commenced after six years from the date of injury."(FN1)  The
  Commissioner rejected the statute-of-limitations defense, noting that the
  "date of injury" for workers' compensation purposes is statutorily defined
  as "the point in time when the injury . . .  is reasonably discoverable and
  apparent."  Id. § 656(b).  The Commissioner found that the permanent injury
  was not reasonably discoverable and apparent until the medical end point in
  claimant's recovery from the surgery, between August 8 and 22, 1995 (six to
  eight weeks after surgery).  This finding was based on claimant's affidavit
  stating that he did not have his knee evaluated for permanent injury until
  August 2001, and the affidavit of claimant's orthopedic surgeon, stating
  that "a reasonable period of time for [claimant] to have reached a medical
  end point following such surgery, and for him to have known whether he
  suffered any permanent impairment to his knee, is between six and eight
  weeks."  Measured from this time frame, claimant's application was within
  the six year limitations period.  Accordingly, the Commissioner ruled that
  claimant was entitled to seek permanent disability benefits.  This appeal
  followed. 

       ¶  4.     Our review in this matter is limited to questions of law
  certified by the Commissioner,  21 V.S.A. § 672, and "tempered by the
  considerable deference we must accord [the Commissioner's] ruling." Laumann
  v. Dept. of Pub. Safety, 2004 VT 60, ¶ 7, 857 A.2d 309.  "The Commissioner's
  decision is presumed valid, to be overturned only if there is a clear
  showing to the contrary." Id. (internal citation omitted).  The question
  certified by the Commissioner is whether the "claim for permanent partial
  disability benefits was barred by the statute of limitations." Employer
  maintains that the Commissioner erred in measuring the six-year limitations
  period from the date of medical end result.  Employer asserts, rather, that
  claimant's right to permanent disability benefits was reasonably
  discoverable and apparent either on the date of injury in May 1995, or the
  date of surgery on June 27, 1995, and therefore that the claim for
  permanent disability benefits, filed in August 2001, was untimely. 
  Employer submitted no evidence on this point, however, and thus the only
  record evidence was claimant's affidavit stating that he was unaware of the
  permanent injury until much later, and the surgeon's affidavit indicating
  that a reasonable time for claimant to have known that he suffered a
  permanent impairment was the period commencing in August 1995. 
  Accordingly, there is no evidentiary basis to support employer's claim, or
  to disturb the Commissioner's findings.  See Grather v. Gables Inn. Ltd.,
  170 Vt. 377, 383,