### IN THE SUPREME COURT, STATE OF WYOMING

2013 WY 26

OCTOBER TERM, A.D. 2012

March 6, 2013

STATE OF WYOMING, ex rel., WYOMING

WORKERS’ SAFETY AND COMPENSATION

DIVISION,

Appellant

(Petitioner),

v

.

TIMOTHY SMITH,

Appellee

(Respondent). No. S

- 12

- 0169

Appeal from the District Court of Natrona County

The Honorable Catherine E. Wilking, Judge

Representing Appellant:

Gregory A. Phillips, Attorney General; John D. Rossetti, Deputy Attorney

General; Michael J. Finn, Senior Assistant Attorney Gener al; Kelly Roseberry,

Assistant Attorney General; Amy M. Taheri, Special Assistant Attorney General.

R e presenting Appellee:

Robert A. Nicholas, Nicholas Law Office, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Before KITE, C.J., and HILL, VOIGT, BURKE, and DAVIS, JJ.

N O T I C E : T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o f o r m a l r e v i s i o n b e f

o r e p u b l i c a t i o n i n P a c i f

i c R e p o r t e r T h i r d

. R e a d e r

s

a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f

y t h e C l e r

k o f t h e S u p r

e m e C o u r

t

, S u p r e m e C o u r

t B u i l d i n g , C h e y e n n e , W y o m i n g

8 2 0 0 2

, o f a n y t y p o g r

a p h i c a l o r o t h e r f

o r m a l e r r

o r s s o t h a t c o r r

e c t i o n m a y b e m a d e b e f o r e f i n a l p u b l i c a t i o n i n

t h e p e r m a n e n t v o l u m e

.1

B U R K E

, J u s t i c e

.

[ ¶ 1 ] Appellant, Wyoming Workers’ Safety and C o m p e n s a t i o n D i v i s i o n

, c h a l l e n g e s a n

order from the Office of Administra tive Hearings awarding additional temporary t o t a l

disa bility (TTD) benefits to Appellee, Timothy Smith

. T h e D i v i s i o n c o n t e n d s t h e a w a r d

exceeded the maximum period for which an injured worker may receive t e m p o r a r y t o t a l

disability benefits

. We agree and reverse

.

I S S U E

[ ¶ 2 ] T h e D i v i s i o n p r e s e n t s a s i n g l e i s s u e :

Smith sustained a compensable neck injury and, despite four

s e p a r a t e s u r g

e r i e s t o a d d r e s s i t

, n e v

e r r e t u r n e d t o w o r k

. The

D i v i s i o n p a i d S m

i t h Temporary Total Disability benefits for

t h i r t y

- six months

— the maximum p e r i o d a l l o w e d b y W y o

. Stat. Ann. § 27

- 14

- 404(a) and the Division’s Rules. T h e OAH found that each of Smith’s four separate surgeries was a

s e c o n d c o m

p e n s a b l e i n

j u r y

, e x t e n d i n g t h e a m o u n t o f t i m e t h e

Division could pay TTD benefits. Do Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 27

-

14

- 404(a) and the Division’s Rules limi t T T D b e n e f i t s t o a cumulative maximum of thirty

- six m o n t h s f o r i n j u r i e s resulting from any one incident or accident regardless o f t h e second compensable injury rule?

M r

. S m i t h p h r a s e s t h e i s s u e a s f

o l l o w s :

D o e s a second compensable injury restart the li m i t a t i o n period for p a y i n g t e m

p o r a r y t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y b e n e f i t s u n d e r

W.S. 27

- 14

- 404(a)?

F A C T S

[ ¶ 3 ] T h e f

a c t s i n t h i s c a s e a r e n o t i n d i s p u t e

. Mr. Smith originally injured his neck in

2 0 0 1

. H e w a s d i a g

n o s e d w i t h a C 5

- 6 d i s k h e r n i a t i o n

, u n d e r w e n t f u s i o n s u r g

e ry, and

r e t u r n e d t o w o r k a f

t e r a p e r i o d o f r e c o v

e r y

. 1 Subsequently, in February, 2006, w h i l e

w o r k i n g a s a m e c h a n i c f

o r W y o m i n g M a c h i n e r y i n C a s p e r

, M r

. S m i t h f e l l b a c k w a r d s a n d

r e i n j u r e d h i s n e c k

. A s a r e s u l t o f t h i s i n c i d e n t

, M r

. S m i t h ’ s t r e a t i n g p h y s i c i a n

, D r

. C l a y t o n T u r n e r

, c o m

p l e t e d a t e m

p o r a r y t o t a

l d i s a b i l i t y f

o r m c e r t i f y i n g t h a t M r

. S m

i t h

1 There is n o indication in the record that Mr. Smith’s 2001 injury was work

- related.2

w a s t e m p o r a r i l y d i s a b l e d f

r o m r e t u r n i n g t o a n y g a i n f u l e m p l o y m e n t s t a r t i n g o n M a r c h

3 0

, 2 0 0 6

.

[ ¶ 4 ] O v e r t h e n e x t f

o u r y e a r s

, M r

. S m

i t h u n d e r w e n t a s e r i e s o f s u r g e r i es on his cervical

s p i n e

. I n M a y

, 2 0 0 6

, D r

. T u r n e r p e r f o r m e d a n a n t e r i o r c e r v

i c a l d i s k e c t o m y a n d f

u s i o n at

t h e C 6

- 7 l e v

e l a n d r e m o v

e d a p l a t e f

r o m t h e C 5

- 6 level that had been placed there during

t h e 2 0 0 1 f

u s i o n s u r g

e r y

. I n F e b r u a r y

, 2 0 0 7

, a C T s c a n of M r. Smith’s neck r e v e a l e d t h a t

the C6

- 7 fusion had not healed. Consequently, Dr. Turner performed a repeat anterior

cervical fusion surgery at the C6

- 7 l e v e l i n M a y

, 2 0 0 7

. T h a t s u r g e r y a l s o f

a i l e d t o

achieve a solid fusion. As a result, Dr. Turner conduc ted a third su r g e r y i n F e b r

u a r y

, 2008, in which he inserted a bone graft at the C6

- 7 level

. M r

. S m i t h c o n t i n u e d t o

experience neck pain after the third procedure , and Dr. Turner c o n t i n u e d t o c e r t i f

y t h a t

Mr. Smith was temporarily totally disabled

. During t h e p e r i o d f r o m M a r c h

, 2 0 0 6 t

h r o u g h

March, 2009, Dr. Turner certified Mr. Smith’s temporary total disability in twenty

- f i v e

successive one

- and two

- month periods. Based on these certifications

, t h e D i v i s i o n p a i d

Mr. Smith TTD benefits continuously for th irty

- six months.

[ ¶ 5 ] In the summer of 2009, Mr. Smith began experiencing left shoulder and arm pain

i n a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h h i s n e c k p a i n

. I n D e c e m b e r

, h e r e c e i v

e d a n e r v e r o o t b l o c k a t t h e C 5

l e v e l t h a t t e m

p o r a r i l y a l l e v

i a t e d h i s s h o u l d e r a n d a r m p a i n

. B a s e d o n the results of the

n e r v e b l o c k

, D r

. T u r n e r p r o p o s e d s u r g e r y t o a l l e v

i a t e t h e s h o u l d e r a n d u

p p e r a r m p a i n

. D r

. T u r n e r p e r f

o r m e d a n a n t e r i o r d i s k e c t o m y a n d f u s i o n a t t h e C 4

- 5 l e v

e l in February,

2 0 1 0

.

[ ¶ 6 ] M r

. S m i t h s o u g

h t a d d i t i o n a

l T T D b e n e f

i t s f o r t h e t r e a tment period from March,

2 0 0 9 t o t h e F e b r

u a r y

, 2 0 1 0 s u r g

e r y

, a n d a f

t e r t h e F e b r

u a r y

, 2 0 1 0 s u r g

e r y

. T h e D i v i s i o n

i s s u e d a F i n a l D e t e r m i n a t i o n d e n y i n g p a y m e n t o f a d d i t i o n a l T T D b e n e f i t s f o r t h i s p e r i o d

, noting that Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 27

- 14

- 404(a) limits the amount of time for which TTD

benefits may be received by an injured worker. T he Division stated t h a t “ w e d o n o t

a p p r o v e t h e p a y m e n t o f t e m

p o r a r y t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y b e n e f i t s a f t e r M a r c h 3 0

, 2 0 0 9

, a s y o u have received thirty six (36) months of temporary total d i s a b i l i t y f o r y o u r c e r v i c a l s p i n e work injury of February 28, 2006.” Mr. Sm i t h o b j e c t e d t o t

h e D i v i s i o n ’ s F i n a l

D etermination, and the matter was referred to the Office of Administrative Hearing s f o r a contested case hearing.

[ ¶ 7 ] B o t h p a r t i e s f

i l e d m o t i o n s f

o r s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t

. The OAH determined that

M r

. S m i t h w a s e n t i t l e d t o a d d i t i o n a l T T D b e n e f i t s a n d g r a n t e d M r

. Smith’s motion

. I t

r e a s o n e d t

h a t M r

. S m

i t h ’ s s h o u l d e r a n d a r m p a i n c o n s t i t u t e d a “ s e c o n d c o m p e n s a b l e injury,” and that a second compensable i njury results in a new injury date w h i c h r e s e t s

the period for which TTD benefits may be received under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 27

- 14

- 404(a). In making this determination, the OAH stated :

I t s h o u l d b e n o t e d t h e s e c o n d c o m p e n s a b l e i n

j u r y r u l e w a s3 c r e a t e d b y t h e c o u r t a n d i s n o t f o u n d i n t h e s t a t u

t e s

. T h e

s t a t u t e s r e q

u i r e a t i m e l y f

i l i n g o f a R e p o r t o f I

n j u r y f o r a n y

w o r k i n j u r y

, y e t t h i s p r o v

i s i o n h a s n o t b e e n r e q u i r e d i n

s e c o n d c o m

p e n s a b l e i n

j u r y c a s e s

. I

t f o l l o w s t h a t o t

h e r

s t a t u t o r y r e q u i r e m e n t s a l s o d o n o t a p p l y i n s e c o n d

c o m p e n s a b l e i n

j u r y c a s e s

. T h i s O f

f i c e f i n d s a s e c o n d

c o m p e n s a b l e i n

j u r y i s a n e w i n

j u r y a n d a

n e m p l o y e e i s

e n t i t l e d t o T T D b e n e f

i t s f o r t h e s e c o n d c o m

p e n s a b l e i n

j u r y

. T h i s O f f i c e a l s o f i n d s t h e l i m

i t a t i o n o f T T D b e n e f

i t s i n t h e

s t a t u t e a n d t h e r

u l e a p p l i e s t o t

h e o r i g i n a l i n j u r y a n d a

n

e m p l o y e e i s e n t i t l e d t o a d d i t i o n a l T T D b e n e f

i t s i n e x c e s s o f

3 6 m o n t h s i f t h e r e i s a n e w a n d s u b s e q u e n t i n j u r y

.

[ ¶ 8 ] After receiving the OAH’s order, the Division f i l e d a p e t i t i o n f

o r r e v i e w i n d i s t r i c t

court

. That case was assigned a s Civil Action No. 92410

. The Division also i s s u e d a

second Final Determination which concluded that Mr. S m i t h h a d n o a c t u a

l m o n t h l y earning s at the time of each of his successive surgeries. As a result, the Division set t h e

rat e of pay for Mr. Smith’s temporary total disability benefit at zero. M r

. S m i t h o b j e c t e d

to the Division’s determination, and th at matter was also referred to the OAH. T h e parties again filed cross motions for summary judgment, and the OAH granted summary judgment in favor of Mr. Smith

. T h e D i v i s i o n f i l e d a s e c o n d p e t i t i o n f

o r r e v i e w i n

d i s t r i c t court , and that case was assigned as Civil Action No. 93091. T he district c o u r t

subsequently consolidated the appeals on the Division’s motion

. T he district cou r t

affirmed both of the OAH’s orders granting summary judgment to Mr. Smith

. T h e

D i v i s i o n f

i l e d a t i m e ly appeal. On appeal, t he Division challenges only the OAH’s i n i t i a l

order finding Mr. Smith eligible for additional TTD benefits.

S T A N D A R D O F R E V I E W

[ ¶ 9 ] T h e i s s u e p r e s e n t e d i n t h i s c a s e i s o n e o f s t a t u t o r y i n t e r p r e t a t i o n

. Statutory

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n r a i s e s q u e s t i o n s o f l a w

, w h i c h w e r e v i e w d e n o v o

. W y o m i n g Dep’

t o f

Envtl. Quality v. Wyoming Outdoor Council

, 2 0 1 2 W Y 1 3 5

, ¶ 8

, 2 8 6 P

. 3 d 1 0 4 5

, 1 0 4 8

(Wyo. 2012)

.

T h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a n d c o r r e c t a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e

p rovisions of the Wyoming Worker’ s C o m p e n s a t i o n

A c t a r e q u e s t i o n s o f l a w o v e r w h i c h o u r r e v i e w

a u t h o r i t y i s p l e n a r y

. C o n c l u s i o n s o f l a w m a d e b y a n

a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a g e n c y a r e a f

f i r m e d o n l y i f t h e y a r e i n

a ccord with the law. We do not afford any d e f e r e n c e t o the agency’ s d e t e r m i n a t i o n

, a n d w e w i l l c o r r e c t a n y

e r r o r m a d e b y t h e a g

e n c y i n e i t h e r i n t e r

p r e t i n g o r applying the law.4

S t a t e e x r e l

. W y o

. W o r k e r s ’ S a f e t y & C o m p

. D i v

. v. Singer , 2011 WY 57, ¶ 5 , 24 8 P

. 3 d

1155, 1157 (Wyo. 2011) (quoting B a l l v

. S t a t e e x r e l

. W y o

. W o r k e r s ’ S a f e t y & C o m p

. Div. , 2010 WY 128, ¶ 18, 239 P.3d 621, 627 (Wyo. 2010) ). W e review the d i s t r i c t

court’s decision as if it had come directly from the administrative agency. Anderson v

. State ex rel. Wyo. Workers ’ Safety & Comp. Div. , 2010 WY 157, ¶ 7

, 2 4 5 P

. 3 d 2 6 3

, 2 6 6

(Wyo. 2010)

.

D I S C U S S I O N

[ ¶ 1 0 ] The Wyoming Worker’ s Compensation Act provides for the award of TTD

benefits to an injured worker. The purpose of a TTD award is “to provi d e i n c o m e f o r a n employee during the time of healing from his injury and unti l h i s c o n d i t i o n h a s

s tabilized.” Phillips v. TIC

- The Industrial Co. of Wyoming, Inc. (In re Phillips)

, 2 0 0 5

WY 40, ¶ 27 , 109 P.3d 520, 532 (Wyo. 2005)

. A “temporary total disabi l i t y ” i s d e f i n e d

under the Act as follows :

“ T e m p o r a r y t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y ” m e a n s t h a t p e r i o d o f t i m e a n

e m p l o y e e i s t e m

p o r a r i l y a n d t o t a

l l y i n c a p a c i t a t e d f

r o m

p e r f o r m i n g e m

p l o y m e n t a t a n y g

a i n f u l e m p l o y m e n t o r

o c c u p a t i o n f o r w h i c h h e i s r e a s o n a b l y s u i t e d b y e x p e r i e n c e o r

t r a i n i n g

. T h e p e r i o d o f t e m p o r a r y t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y t e r m i n a t e s a t

t h e t i m e t h e e m

p l o y e e c o m

p l e t e l y r e c o v

e r s o r q u a l i f

i e s f o r

b e n e f i t s u n d e r W

. S

. 2 7

- 1 4

- 4 0 5 [ g o v e r n i n g p e r m a n e n t p a r

t i a l

d i s a b i l i t y ] o r 2 7

- 1 4

- 4 0 6 [ g o v e r n i n g p e r m a n e n t t o t a l

d i s a b i l i t y ]

.

W y o

. S t a t

. Ann. § 27

- 14

- 102 (a)(xviii) (LexisNexis 2011)

.

[ ¶ 1 1 ] Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 27

- 14

- 4 0 4 e s t a b l i s h e s a l i m i t a t i o n o n t h e a m o u n t o f t i m e t h a t a n injured worker may receive TTD benefits. T h e s t a t u t e p r o v i d e s

, i n r e l e v

a n t p a r t

, a s

follows:

§ 2 7

- 1 4

- 4 0 4

. T e m p o r a r y t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y ; b e n e f i t s ;

d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f e l i g i b i l i t y ; e x c e p t i o n s f o r v o l u n t e e r s o r

p r i s o n e r s ; p e r i o d o f c e r t i f i c a t i o n l i m i t e d ; t e m p o r a r y l i g h t

d u t y e m p l o y m e n t

.

( a ) I f a f t e r a c o m p e n s a b l e i n

j u r y i s s u s t a i n e d a n d a s a r e s u l t o f

t h e i n j u r y t h e e m

p l o y e e i s s u b

j e c t t o t e m

p o r a r y t o t a

l d i s a b i l i t y

a s d e f i n e d u n d e r W

. S

. 2 7

- 1 4

- 1 0 2 ( a ) ( x v i i i )

, t h e i n j u r e d

e m p l o y e e i s e n t i t l e d t o r e c e i v e a t e m p o r a r y t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y

a w a r d f o r t h e p e r i o d o f t e m

p o r a r y t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y a s p r o v i d e d5 b y W

. S

. 2 7

- 1 4

- 4 0 3 ( c )

. T h e p e r i o d f o r r e c e i v i n g a t e m

p o r a r y

t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y a w a r d u n d

e r t h i s s e c t i o n f o r i n j u r i e s

r e s u l t i n g f r o m a n y o n e ( 1 ) i n c i d e n t o r a c c

i d e n t s h a l l n o t

e x c e e d a c u m u l

a t i v e p e r i o d o f t w e n t y

- f o u r ( 2 4 ) m o n t h s ,

e x c e p t t h a t t h e d i v i s i o n p u r s u a n t t o i t

s r u l e s a n d r e

g u l a t i o n s

a n d i n i t s d i s c r e t i o n m a y i n t h e e v e n t o

f e x t r a o r d i n a r y

c i r c u m s t a n c e s a w

a r d a d d i t i o n a l t e m

p o r a r y t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y

b e n e f i t s

. The division’ s d e c i s i o n t o g r a n t s u c h a d d i t i o n a l

b e n e f i t s s h a l l b e r e v i e w a b l e b y a h e a r i n g e x a m i n e r o n l y f

o r

an abuse o f discretion by the division.

( E m p h a s i s a d d e d

. ) A s a u t h o r i z e d u n d e r t h i s s t a t u t e

, t h e D i v i s i o n h a s i s s u e d r u l e s a n d

r e g u l a t i o n s r e l a

t i n g t o t h e r e c e i p t o f a d d i t i o n a l T T D b e n e f i t s i n e x t r a o r d i n a r y

c i r c u m s t a n c e s

. A c c o r d i n g t o t h o s e r u l e s

, a n a w a r d o f a d d i t i o n a

l T T D b e n e f

i t s s h a l l n o t

e x c e e d t w e l v

e m o n t h s :

( b ) L i m i t a t i o n o n P e r i o d o f T e m p o r a r y T o t a l D i s a b i l i t y ( T T D ) ; E x t r a o r d i n a r y C i r c u m s t a n c e

.

(i) The period for receiving a TTD award under W.S.

§ 2 7

- 1 4

- 4 0 4 r e s u l t i n g f r o m a s i n g

l e i n c i d e n t

,

a c c i d e n t

, o r p e r i o d o f c u m u l a t i v e t r a u m a o r e

x p o s u r e

s h a l l n o t e x c e e d a c u m u l

a t i v e p e r i o d o f 2 4 m o n t

h s

,

e x c e p t t h a t t h e D i v i s i o n

, i n i t s d i s c r e t i o n

, m a y a w a r d

a d d i t i o n a l T T D b e n e f

i t s i f t h e c l a i m a n t e s t a b l i s h e s b y

c l e a r a n d c o n v

i n c i n g e v i d e n c e t h a

t t h e c l a i m a n t :

( A ) r e m a i n s t o t a l l y d i s a b l e d

, d u e s o l e l y t o a

w o r k

- r e l a t e d i n

j u r y ;

( B ) h a s n o t r e c o v

e r e d t o t h e e x t e n t t h a

t h e o r

s h e c a n r e t

u r n t o g a i n f u l e m p l o y m e n t ;

( C ) r e a s o n a b l y e x

p e c t s t o r e t

u r n t o g a i n f u l

e m p l o y m e n t w i t h i n 1 2 m o n t

h s f o l l o w i n g t h e

d a t e o f t h e f

i r s t T T D c l a i m o c c u r r i n g a f t e r t h e

e x p i r a t i o n o f t h e 2 4

- m o n t

h p e r i o d ;

( D ) d o e s n o t h a v

e a n a s c e r t a i n a b l e l o s s w h i c h

w o u l d q u a

l i f y f o r benefits under W.S. §§ 27

- 14

- 405 or 406; and,

( E ) h a s t a k e n a

l l r e a s o n a b l e m e a s u r e s t o6 f a c i l i t a t e r e c o v

e r y

, i n c l u d i n g c o m

p l i a n c e w i t h

t h e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s o f t h e t r e a t i n g p h y s i c i a n

.

( i i ) N o a w a r d s o f a d d i t i o n a l T T D b e n e f i t s p u r s u a n t t

o

s u b s e c t i o n ( i ) o f t h i s s e c t i o n s h a l l e x c e e d 1 2

c u m u l a t i v e c a l e n d

a r m o n t h s

.

R u l e s

, R e g

u l a t i o n s and Fee Schedules of the Wyoming Workers’ Safety a n d

Compensation Division, c h. 7 , § 2(b ) (i)

- (ii) (emphasis added)

. B o t h p a r t i e s c o n t e n d t h a

t

Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 27

- 14

- 4 0 4 ( a ) i s u n a m b i g u o u s

. W h e n a s t a t u t e i s u n a m

b i g u o u s

, w e give effect to the plain language of the statute. Stallman v. State ex rel. Wyo

. W o r k e r s ’

Safety & Comp. Div. (In re Stallman)

, 2 0 1 2 W Y 1 4 7

, ¶ 1 4

, 2 8 8 P

. 3 d 7 0 7

, 7 1 2 ( W y o

. 2012).

[ ¶ 1 2 ] It is undisputed that Mr. Smith was injured when he fell at work in February,

2 0 0 6

. The Division contends that all of Mr. Smith’s claims for TTD benefits a r i s e f r o m

that accident. Accordingly, the Division asserts that

, b e c a u s e t h e l i m i t a t i o n o n r e c e i p t o f

TTD benefits applies to all “injuries” resulting from “any one (1) incident or accident,”

Mr. Smith is entitled to TTD benefits for a maximum of thirty

- s ix months, including the

twenty

- four months authorized under Section 404(a), and an a d d i t i o n a l t w e l v e m o n t h s

allowed in extraordinary circumstances by Division rules

. B e c a u s e t h e D i v i s i o n p a i d

TTD benefits to Mr. Smith for thirty

- six months, from March, 2 0 0 6 t o M a r c h

, 2 0 0 9

, i t

asserts that he is not entitled to any additional T T D b e n e f i t s a s a r e s u l t o f h i s w o r k p l a c e

accident.

[ ¶ 1 3 ] M r

. S m i t h contends t h a t t h e D i v i s i o n ’ s p o s i t i o n “ c o n f l i c t s w i t h t h e s e c o n d

compensable injury rule.” Claiming that each of his un s u c c e s s f u l s u r g e r i e s g a v e r i s e t o a

“second compensable injury ,” he asserts that the “ s t a t u t o r y t i m e r e s t r i c t i o n s e t f o r t h i n

W.S. § 27

- 14

- 4 0 4 ( a ) n e c e s s a r i l y s t a r t s a n e w a f t e r t h e u n a n t i c i p a t e d s e c o n d s u r g

e r y i s performed because the second surgery was tre a t i n g a n e w i n j u r y f r o m a s e p a r a t e

occurrence.” We do not agree.

[ ¶ 1 4 ] The limitation on receipt of TTD benefits set forth in Section 404(a) applies to

“ i n j u r i e s r e s u l t i n g f

r o m a n y o n e ( 1 ) i n c i d e n t o r a c c i d e n t

. ” T h i s p h r a s i n g i s c o n s i s t e n t

with the notion, pr e v

i o u s l y e x p r e s s e d b y t h i s C o u r t

, t h a t “ a s i n g l e i n c i d e n t a t w o r k c a n give rise to more than one compensable injury.” In re Worker’ s Comp. Claim of

K aczmarek ex rel. Wyo. Workers’ Safety

, 2 0 0 9 W Y 1 1 0

, ¶ 9

, 2 1 5 P

. 3 d 2 7 7

, 2 8 1 ( W y o

. 2009). The distinction b etween the terms “injury” and “accident” inherent in th e principle that multiple injuries may arise from a single workplace accident i s f u r t h e r

confirmed i n our precedent. In In re Barnes , 587 P.2d 214, 218 (Wyo. 1978), w e s t a t e d

that “the term ‘injury’, a s u s e d i n t h e W o r k e r ’ s C o m p e n s a t i o n L a w

, m e a n s c o m p e n s a b l e

i n j u r y a n d i s n o t u s e d i n t h e s e n s e o f t h e o c c u r r e n c e o f a n i n d u s t r i a l a c c i d e n t g i v i n g r i s e to or causing the compensable injury.” B y u s i n g t h e t e r m “ i n j u r i e s

, ” i n t h e p l u r a

l f o r m

,7

S e c t i o n 4 0 4 ( a ) a n

t i c i p a t e s t h a t m

u l t i p l e i n j u r i e s m a y a r i s e f

r o m a s i n g

l e w o r k p l a c e

a c c i d e n t

. T h e s t a t u t e c l e a r l y p r o v i d e s

, h o w e v

e r

, t h a t a w a r d s o f T T D b e n e f i t s f o r a l l s u c h

i n j u r i e s r e s u l t i n g f

r o m “ a n y o n e ( 1 ) i n c i d e n t o r a c c i d e n t ” a r e s u b j e c t t o t h e “ c u m

u l a t i v e perio d” set forth in the statute.

[ ¶ 1 5 ] I n o r d e r t o r e c e i v

e w o r k e r ’ s c o m

p e n s a t i o n b e n e f

i t s

, a c l a i m a n t h a s t h e b u r d e n o f

proving a causal connection between the work

- r e l a t e d i n j u r y a n d t h e i n

j u r y f o r w h i c h

benefits are sought. Davenport v. State ex rel. Wyo. Worker s’ Safety & Comp. Div.

, 2 0 1 2

WY 6, ¶ 22 , 268 P.3d 1038, 1044 (Wyo. 2012)

. T h e s e c o n d c o m p e n s a b l e i n

j u r y r u l e applies when “ a n i n i t i a l c o m p e n s a b l e i n

j u r y r i p e n s i n t o a c o n d i t i o n r e q u i r i n g a d d i t i o n a l

m edical intervention .” Id ., ¶ 21, 268 P.3d at 1044. We h a v e e x p l a i n e d t h a t t h e s e c o n d

compensable injury rule is “ not a court

- created benefit or remedy,” but rather “ a n expression of this Court’ s interpretation of the causal li n k r e q u i r e d b e t w e e n a n employee’ s work and original work injury and any related and s u b s e q u e n t l y d e v e l o p e d

injury or condition. ” Ball , ¶¶ 25

- 26, 239 P.3d at 628

- 29

. T h e o r i g i n a l w o r k i n j u r y occurred in this case in February, 2006.

[ ¶ 1 6 ] M r

. S m i t h r e l i e s o n t h e f o l l o w i n g l a n g

u a g e f r o m o u r d e c i s i o n i n Casper Oil Co. v.

E v e n s o n

, 8 8 8 P

. 2 d 2 2 1

, 2 2 6 ( W y o

. 1 9 9 5 ) t o s u p p o r t h i s claim that a second compensable

injury restarts the maximum period for which temporary total disability benefits may be

r e c e i v e d u n d e r W

y o

. S t a t

. A n n

. § 2 7

- 1 4

- 4 0 4 ( a ) :

The phrase “if after a compensable injury” i s i m p o r t a n t

to our analysis. Wyo. Stat. § 27

- 14

- 4 0 4 ( a )

. T h e p h r a s e n e i t h e r

c r e a t e s n o r i s s u b

j e c t t o a n y t i m e l i m i t a t i o n s

. T h e s t a t u t e

s i m p l y r e q u i r e s t h a t t h e t e m

p o r a r y d i s a b i l i t y b e t h e r e s u l t o f a

c o m p e n s a b l e i n

j u r y

. T h e s t a t u t e d o e s n o t r e q u i r e t h a t t

h e

temporary disability come about as a result of the f irst

compensable injury, or the original c o m p e n s a b l e i n

j u r y

, b u t

simply that the temporary disability be caused by a

c ompensable i n

j u r y

. T h e s t a t u t e i n n o w a y l i m i t s t h e a w a r d o f

temporary total disability benefits for a second c o m p e n s a b l e

i n j u r y t o a c e r t a i n p e r i o d o f t i m e f o l l o w i n g t h e f

i r s t o r o r i g

i n a l

compensable injury.

( E m p h a s i s i n o r i g i n a l

. ) O u r d e c i s i o n i n t h a t c a s e

, h o w e v e r

, d i d n o t a d d r e s s t h e m a x i m u m

p e r i o d f o r w h i c h T T D b e n e f

i t s m a y b e r e c e i v

e d u n d e r S e c t i o n 4 0 4 ( a )

. I n f a c t

, a t t h a t

t i m e

, t h e s e c o n d s e n t e n c e o f S e c t i o n 4 0 4 ( a )

, s e t t i n g f o r t h t h e m a x i m

u m p e r i o d f

o r r e c e i p t

o f T T D b e n e f

i t s

, d i d n o t a p p e a r i n t h e s t a t u t e

. T h e t w e n t y

- f

o u r m o n t h l i m

i t a t i o n o n

r e c e i p t o f T T D b e n e f

i t s w a s a d d e d t o t h e s t a t

u t e i n 1 9 9 6

, t

h e y e a r f o l l o w i n g o u r d e c i s i o n

i n Casper Oil Co. v. Evenson . 1996 Wyo. Sess. Laws ch. 82, § 1. I n c o n t r a s t t o t

h e

present case, t he issue in Casper Oil was whether the claimant’s “ 1993 f u s i o n s u r g

e r y was linked to his initial back injury in 1 9 8 9 a n d w a s

, t h e r e f o r e

, a s u b s e q

u e n t8

c o m p e n s a b l e i n

j u r y f o r w h i c h t h e h e a r i n g e x a m i n e r c o u l d p r o p e r l y a w a r d m e d i c a l

b e n e f i t s a n d t e m

p o r a r y t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y b e n e f i t s .” Id. at 224. W

h e n t h e q u o t e d l a n g

u a g e i s placed in the appropriate cont ext, it is clear t h a t t h e d e c i s i o n h e l d t h a t t h e s t a t

u t e d i d n o t

restrict eligibility for receipt of TTD benefits to s e c o n d c o m p e n s a b l e i n

j u r i e s a r i s i n g

within a certain time following the original injury. In this case, t h e D i v i s i o n d o e s n o t

contend that Mr. Smith is not e n t i t l e d t o r e c e i v

e b e n e f i t s f o r a s e c o n d c o m

p e n s a b l e injury . It simply asserts that additional TTD b e n e f i t s c a n n o t b e a w a r d e d b e c a u s e

Mr. Smith has already received the maximum benefits allowable. O ur holding in C a s p e r

Oil has no bearing on the present case

. M r

. S m i t h ’ s r e l i a n c e o n t h e s e c o n d c o m p e n s a b l e injury rule is misplaced.

[ ¶ 1 7 ] In sum, we find Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 27

- 14

- 404(a) and the Division’s rules t o b e

u n a m b i g u o u s

. R e c e i p t o f t e m

p o r a r y t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y b e n e f i t s i s l i m i t e d t o a m a x i m u m period o f thirty

- six months, which includes twenty

- f o u r m o n t h s a

u t h o r i z e d u n d e r S e c t i o n

4 0 4 ( a ) a n d a n a d d i t i o n a l t w e l v

e m o n t h s a l l o w e d i n e x t r a o r d i n a r y c i r c u m s t a n c e s p u r s u a n t

to Division rules . Under the plain language of the statute, this limitation applies to a l l

“ i n j u r i e s ” r e s u l t i n g f

r o m “ a n y o n e ( 1 ) i n c i d e n t o r a c c i d e n t

, ” e n c o m p a s s i n g s i t u a t i o n s i n

w h i c h t h e c l a i m a n t r e c e i v e s m u l t i p l e i n

j u r i e s s i m

u l t a n e o u s l y o r a s u b s e q u e n t

compensable injury as the result of a single workplace accident

. B e c a u s e t h e D i v i s i o n awarded TTD benefits to Mr. Smith for a period of thirty

- six months a s a r e s u l t o f a single workplace accident, he is not entitled to receive additional TTD benefits.

[ ¶ 1 8 ] R e v

e r s e d a n d r e m a n d e d f

o r e n t r y o f a n o r d e r c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h i s o p i n i o n

.