GENEWAL 

### THE ATrORNEY

OF TEXAS

Honorable H. C. Plttman, 

### Jr., Chairman, IpdustrlalAccident Board, Walton Building, Austin, Texas Opinion No. WW-

### 333.
Re: Effect of Section 2 of House Bill No, 

### 433, Acts 55th Legislature,Regular Session 1957 (Chapter397, page 

### 1186)on authority of IndustrlalAccident Board to approve compromise setDear Mr. Plttman: tlement agreements.

In your letter of November 8, 1957, you ask:

"Will you give us your opinion as to whether
or not this Board has authorlty to approve a Compromise SettlementAgreementwhich closes the llablllty of an Insurance carrier for euture medical and hospital expense under the Workmen's CompensationAct as amended, I.e. does the word\awardland the wording used In the amendment to Section 

### 5 apply to compromise settlementsand take precedence over Section 12, Article a307v

You further point out that Section 12 of Article 8307, Revised Civil Statutes, gives the Board authority to approve compromise settlementagreementsunder certain conditions,and that House Blll No. 

### 433, amending Section 

### 5 of Article 8307, changes the llablllty of Insurance carriers as to medical and hospital expenses.

Section 2 of House Bill No. 

### 433 reads as follows:

'Sec. 2. Section 

### 5 of Article 8307, Revised Civil Statutes of Texas, 1925, as amended, Is hereby amendedby adding a new paragraphat the end of said Section to read as follows:

"lNotwlthstandlng

any other provision of thls law, as amended, no award of the Board, and no judgmentHonorableH. C. Pittman,

### Jr., Page 2 (W-333).

of the court, havlng jurisdictionof a claim against the associationfor the oost or expense of Items of medical aid, hospital services,nursing, chlropraotlc ,servlces,

medicinesor prostheticappliances furnished to an employeeunder circumstancescreating a llablllty thereforon the part of the associationunder the provisions of thle law, shall Include In such award or judgment any cost or expense of any such Itemsactually furnishedto and received by the employee prior to the date of said award or judgment. The first such final award or ment rendered on such claim shall be remlcata of the llabllltyof the associationforall such cost or expensewhich could have been claimedup to the date of said award or judgment and of the Issue that the Injury-aid employee Is subject to the provlslonsof this law with respect to such Items, but shall not be res Judlcata of the obligationof the associationto furnish or pay for any such Item8 after the date of said award or judgment,

. . .' (Emphasisours)

The remainderof the paragraphprovides for continuing jurisdictionof the Board over the claim for additionalmedical expenses and for appeals to the courts from each successiveaward of such medical benefits.

The added paragraph relates only to awards (or denials) of medical aid and, In our opinion, does not have any.bearlngon the function of the Board In approving compromise settlement agreementsunder Sec~tlon 12. The making of awards and th$g;proval of settlementsare two distinct functions of the Board. Board's approval of a compromise settlementagreement Is not an award of compensation

. . . Neither Is It an order denying compensation." CommercialCasualty Co. v. Hilton, 187 S.W. 2d 1081 (Comm. Am., opinion approvedby S. Ct.). The Board Is prohibited from awarding the workman any money for future medical aid, but there Is nothlng In the Act which would bar or dlmlnlsh the right of the parties to enter Into a contract settling their rights and llabllltleswith respect to future medical expenses of the kind referred to In the amendment. There being no amendment to Section 12, and there being no mention elsewhere in the Act of the role the Board Is to play In the approvalor disapprovalof compromise settlementagreementswith respect to future medical aid, the conclusion seems Inescapablethat the LegislatureIntended
no change with respect thereto.

The purpose of the amendment to Section 5 was to enable the workman to obtain unlimitedmedical treatment. Although his claim or cause of action Is broken down Into separateperiods of six months each, there Is nothing In the Act to Indicate that his claim for future medical aid may not be settledby aHonorable H. C. Plttman,Jr., Page 3 (ww-333).

compromise settlementagreement once and for all. It Is to be assumed that the Legislaturewas cognizantof the rules of the Board which require a showing that maximum recoveryhas been reached before It wlll approve compromisesettlements,and that the Legislaturecontemplatedthat the Board would discharge Its responslbllltyto protect the +&red workman In this type of settlement agreement,as It had done under the pre-existing law where settlementagreementshave embraced liabilityfor future ' medical treatment.

Therefore, It Is our opinion that the amendment to Sec. 5 of Art. 8307 does not alter the authorltyof the Industrial Accident Board under Sec. 12, and the Board has authorl3.y close the llabllltv of to approve compromise settlementswhich
an Insurance carrier for future medical and hospital expenses.

SUMMARY
Section 2 of House Bill No. 433, Acts of Session, 1957 -_. the 55th Legislature,Regular (Chapter397, page 1186 at 1192) amending Section 5 of Article 8307, Revised Civil Statutes,does not alter the authoritytid duty of the Industrial AccidentBoard under Section 12 with respect to the approvalof compromise settlement agreements,and this authorityextends to agreementswhich termlnate the llablllty of the carrier for future medical and hospital expenses.

Yours very truly,

WILL WILSON AttorneyGeneral of Texas

RRR:mg:pf
APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE Geo. P. Blackburn,Chairman J. C. Davis, Jr. W. V. Geppert Leonard Passmore REVIEWED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL By: James N. Ludlum. Mac0 Stewart Assistant