Title: PUTNAM v CASTLE MOUNTAIN CORP
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 84-323
State: Montana
Issuer: Montana Supreme Court
Date: June 13, 1985

I N THE SUPREME COURT O F THE STATE OF MONTANA No. 84-323 TOM W. PUTNAM, C l a i m a n t a n d A p p e l l a n t , CASTLE MOUNTAIN CORPORATION, E m p l o y e r , UNITED PACIFIC/RELIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY, D e f e n d a n t and R e s p o n d e n t , and LEONARD NIELSEN, d/b/a NIELSEN LOGGING, E m p l o y e r a n d R e s p o n d e n t , a n d STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND. a n d Y: =; DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION, , k c i-,i t z - . r L " %0' ".,e3 D e f e n d a n t s a n d R e s p o n d e n t s . O R D E R W e h a v e n o w c o n s i d e r e d t h e p e t i t i o n s f o r r e h e a r i n g f i l e d o n behalf of Tom W. P u t n a m a n d State C o m p e n s a t i o n Insurance Fund. W e h a v e c o n c l u d e d t h a t a r e v i s i o n i n our o p i n i o n is appropriate. I T I S ORDERED: 1. T h a t t h e f u l l paragraph set f o r t h i m m e d i a t e l y fol- l o w i n g t h e s t a t e m e n t of i s s u e s on page 2 of o u r o p i n i o n d e c i d e d June 13, 1985, i s hereby w i t h d r a w n , t h e w i t h d r a w n p a r a g r a p h b e i n g a s f o l l o w s : " I n i t i a l l y t h e r e were d i s p u t e s a s t o t h e i d e n t i t y o f t h e i n s u r e r and t h e e x t e n t o f coverage, a l l of which have been re- solved. The respondent i n t h i s proceed- i n g i-s S t a t e Compensation I n s u r a n c e Fund ( S t a t e Fund) ." I n p l a c e of such withdrawn paragraph, t h e f o l l o w i n g paragraph i s hereby i n s e r t e d i n o u r opinion: "There is a d i s p u t e a s t o t h e i d e n t i t y o f t h e employer o f t h e c l a i m a n t . The Work- ers' Compensation Court found t h a t claim- a n t 'was an employee o f e i t h e r N i e l s e n o r t h e defendant C a s t l e Mountain Corpora- t i o n . ' The respondent i n t h i s p r o c e e d i n g i s S t a t e Compensation I n s u r a n c e Fund ( S t a t e F u n d ) , which h a s agreed t o a c c e p t l i a b i l i t y f o r t h e c l a i m a n t ' s c l a i m w i t h a re'servation o f r i g h t s a g a i n s t C a s t l e Mountain C o r p o r a t i o n and i t s i n s u r a n c e c a r r i e r . W e d o n o t r u l e upon which p a r t y was t h e employer o f t h e c l a i m a n t . " 2. With t h e e x c e p t i o n o f t h e a c t i o n t a k e n i n p a r a g r a p h 1, t h e p e t i t i o n s f o r r e h e a r i n g a r e d e n i e d . 3 . The o p i n i o n i n t h e above c a u s e d a t e d J u n e 13, 1985, a s modified by t h e above paragraph change, i s approved and c o n s t i t u t e s t h e f i n a l o i n i o n i n t h i s c a u s e . 4 . J DATED t h i s 7 %ay o f J u l y , 1985. W e concur: . ,-' A'- ,q,TL,& ccr(cyief J u s t i c e J u s t i c e 0 ' '-- No. 84-323 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MOlJTANA 1985 Claimant and Appellant, CASTLE b10UNTAIN CORPORATION , Employer, and UNITED PACIFIC/mLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant and Respondent, and LEONARD NIELSEN, d/b/a NIELSEN LOGGING, Employer and Respondent, and STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, and DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION, Defendants and Respondents. APPEAL FROM: Workers' compensation Court, The Honorable Timothy Reardon, Judge presiding. COUNSEL OF RECORD: For Appellant: William T. Kelly, P.C.; Halverson, Sheehy, Prindle h Finn; Patrick Prindle, Billings, Montana For Respondents: Hughes, Kellner, Sullivan & Alke; John Sullivan, Helena, Montana Keefer, Roybal, Hansen, Stacey & Jarussi; Neil Keef er, Billings, Montana Submitted on Briefs: Jan. 24, 1985 Decided: June 13, 1985 Filed: SUN e : 3 1985 Clerk M r . J u s t i c e Fred J. Weber d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion o f t h e Court. T h i s i s a n a p p e a l from t h e o r d e r o f t h e Workers' Compen- s a t i o n Court g r a n t i n g p a r t i a l summary judgment. The a p p e a l c h a l l e n g e s t h e c o u r t ' s r e f u s a l t o a p p l y t h e s t a t u t o r y p e n a l t y t o medical b e n e f i t s and a p o r t i o n o f t h e weekly temporary t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y b e n e f i t s . W e modify a p o r t i o n o f t h e o r d e r and remand t h e c a u s e f o r f u r t h e r proceedings. The i s s u e s a r e : 1. Does t h e p e n a l t y p o r t i o n o f S 39-71-2907, MCA a p p l y t o medica 1 b e n e f i t s ? 2. How should t h e p e n a l t y p r o v i s i o n s o f S 39-71-2907, M C A b e a p p l i e d t o t h e following: ( a ) Temporary t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y b e n e f i t s from t h e d a t e o f i n j u r y on October 6 , 1981 t o J u l y 25, 1983, which w e r e due on J u l y 25, 1983 and n o t p a i d u n t i l a f t e r October 11, 1983. (b) Medical b e n e f i t s due on J u l y 25, 1983 and n o t p a i d u n t i l a f t e r October 11, 1983. 3. Did t h e temporary t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y r a t e awarded t h e c l a i m a n t p r o p e r l y i n c l u d e a l l wages e a r n e d a t t h e t i m e o f h i s i n j u r y ? I n i t i a l l y t h e r e w e r e d i s p u t e s a s t o t h e 1 - d e n t i t y o f t h e i n s u r e r and t h e e x t e n t o f coverage, all. o f which have been r e s o l v e d . The r e s p o n d e n t i n t h i s p r o c e e d i n g i s S t a t e Compen- s a t i o n I n s u r a n c e Fund ( S t a t e Fund) . Claimant s u f f e r e d i n j u r i e s i n two d i f f e r e n t u n r e l a t e d a c c i d e n t s . H e was i n j u r e d on J a n u a r y 1 6 , 1981, w h i l e e m - ployed by a d i f f e r e n t employer a s a t r u c k d r i v e r , r e c e i v i n g weekly wages o f $340 based upon a r a t e o f $8.50 p e r hour. A s a r e s u l t o f t h a t u n r e l a t e d a c c i d e n t , c l a i m a n t r e c e i v e d tempo- r a r y t o t a l compensation b e n e f i t s o f $219 p e r week from Janu- a r y 16, 1981 t o on o r a b o u t November 10, 1981. On October 6 , 1981, w h i l e employed f o r a few days by Leonard N i e l s e n , c l a i m a n t was s e v e r e l y i n j u r e d when a dump t r u c k r a n o v e r him. I n i t i a l l y , t h e S t a t e Fund denied t h e c l a i m f o r t h e October 6 , 1981 a c c i d e n t . The undisputed f i n d i n g s o f f a c t by t h e Workers' Compensation Court i n c l u d e t h e following: 1. I n J u l y 1981, t h e S t a t e Fund s e n t Niel-sen (employer) a premium s t a t e m e n t f o r A p r i l 1 t o June 30, 1981. T h a t s t a t e m e n t n o t i f i e d Nielsen t h a t payment o f t h e amount due was t o b e made w i t h i n 30 d a y s o f t h e s t a t e m e n t o r coverage would b e c a n c e l l e d . 2. On September 2 , 1981, f o l l o w i n g non-payment by N i e l s e n , t h e S t a t e Fund s e n t Nielsen a "courtesy n o t i c e " s t a t i n q t h a t h i s coverage was scheduled f o r c a n c e l l a t i o n on October 1, 1981. 3. On October 8 , 1381 ( 2 d a y s a f t e r c l a i m a n t ' s i n j u r y ) , N i e l s e n ' s payment was r e c e i v e d by t h e S t a t e Fund. 4. Through some t y p e o f a mix-up w i t h i n t h e S t a t e Fund, t h e payment was n o t p r o p e r l y noted and N i e l s e n ' s coverage was c a n c e l l e d . 5. A t t h e t i m e o f t h e c l a i m a n t ' s a c c i d e n t , it was t h e p o l i c y o f t h e S t a t e Fund t o a l l o w an employer a t e n day g r a c e p e r i o d from t h e d a t e o f c a n c e l l a t i o n . ( N i e l s e n ' s payment on October 8 was made w i t h i n t h e t e n day p e r i o d from t h e c a n c e l - l a t i o n d a t e o f October 1, 1981.) 6 . O n October 2 6 , 1981, c l a i m a n t ' s a t t o r n e y forwarded a c l a i m f o r compensation i n which N i e l s e n was l i s t e d a s employer. 7. By letter d a t e d October 29, 1981, t h e Workers' Compensation D i v i s i o n a d v i s e d c l a i m a n t ' s a t t o r n e y t h a t N i e l s e n was uninsured. The Workers' Compensation Court a l s o found t h a t t h e r e was no f u r t h e r communication between t h e D i v i s i o n o r t h e S t a t e Fund and c l a i m a n t f o r approximately 1 7 months. Claim- a n t ' s a t t o r n e y c a l l e d S t a t e Fund on March 1 8 , 1983, and r e c e i v e d a letter a d v i s i n g t h a t N i e l s e n ' s p o l i c y was can- c e l l e d by S t a t e Fund on October 1, 1981 f o r f a i l u r e t o pay t h e premiums. Claimant f i l e d a p e t i t i o n for emergency h e a r - i n g . A t t h a t p o i n t , t h e S t a t e Fund s t a r t e d a n i n q u i r y i n t o i t s p r i o r d e t e r m i n a t i o n on t h e q u e s t i o n o f coverage. On J u l y 2 5 , 1983, t h e Bureau Chief o f t h e S t a t e Fund was a d v i s e d t h a t N i e l s e n ' s coverage was i n e f f e c t on October 6 , 1981. The S t a t e Fund determined t h a t it should a c c e p t l i a b i l i t y f o r t h e c l a i m a n t ' s claim. Various p r o c e d u r a l s t e p s followed, and t h e S t a t e Fund gave a number o f a s s u r a n c e s r e g a r d i n g a c c e p t a n c e of l i a b i l i t y and i t s w i l l i n g n e s s t o pay b o t h compensation and medical b e n e f i t s . O n October 11, 1983, t h e Workers' Compensation C o u r t heard o r a l argument on t h e c a s e and o r d e r e d t h e S t a t e Fund t o make payments o f b o t h medical b e n e f i t s and temporary t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y b e n e f i t s . The c o u r t t h e n concluded t h a t t h e 1981 d e n i a l o f l i a b i l i t y f o r c l a i m a n t ' s c l a i m was n o t u n r e a s o n a b l e w i t h i n t h e meaning o f t h e p e n a l t y s t a t u t e , 5 39-71-2907, MCA. However, t h e c o u r t a l s o reached t h e f o l l o w i n g c o n c l u s i o n s : "Despite i t s c o n t i n u e d agreement t o do so, t h e S t a t e Fund had n o t p a i d compensation and medical b e n e f i t s t o t h e c l a i m a n t a s o f t h e d a t e o f o r a l argument. T h i s d e l a y was u n r e a s o n a b l e , and i n v i t e s a p e n a l t y . The d i f f i c u l t y lies i n d e t e r m i n i n g a t what p o i n t t h e S t a t e Fund should have r e a s o n a b l y r e a l i z e d i t s error and promptly t e n d e r e d t h e s e b e n e f i t s . . . . "The Fund a c t e d promptly t o a s c e r t a i n t h e t r u t h o f t h e improper c a n c e l l a t i o n a l l e g a t i o n found i n t h e P e t i t i o n , b u t i t s d e l a y from J u l y 25, 1983, t o t h e o r d e r o f b e n e f i t s (October 11, 1983) was unreason- a b l e . T h e r e f o r e a 20% p e n a l t y s h a l l b e a s s e s s e d t o temporary t o t a l b e n e f i t s due t h e c l a i m a n t d u r i n g t h a t p e r i o d . " The c o u r t t h e n adjudged t h a t c l a i m a n t was e n t i t l e d t o a 20% i n c r e a s e i n h i s temporary t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y b e n e f i t s f r o m J u l y 25, 1983 u n t i l October 11, 1983. Does t h e p e n a l t y p o r t i o n o f 39-71-2907, M C A a p p l y t o medical b e n e f i t s ? The p e r t i n e n t p o r t i o n o f § 39-71-2907, MCA is: "When payment o f compensation h a s been u n r e a s o n a b l y d e l a y e d o r r e f u s e d by an i n s u r e r , e i t h e r p r i o r o r s u b s e q u e n t t o t h e i s s u a n c e o f an o r d e r by t h e w o r k e r s ' compensation judge g r a n t i n g a c l a i m a n t compensation b e n e f i t s , t h e f u l l amount o f t h e compensation b e n e f i t s due a c l a i m a n t , between t h e t i m e compensation b e n e f i t s w e r e d e l a y e d o r r e f u s e d and t h e d a t e o f t h e o r d e r g r a n t i n g a c l a i m a n t compensation b e n e f i t s , may b e i n c r e a s e d by t h e w o r k e r s ' compensation judge by 20%." T h i s issue h a s j u s t been r e s o l v e d by t h e c a s e o f C a r l s o n v . Cain (Mont. 19851, P.2d , 4 2 St.Rep. 695. I n t h a t c a s e , w e concluded t h a t an award f o r medical payments may b e i n c r e a s e d by t h e Workers' Compensation C o u r t p u r s u a n t t o t h e f o r e g o i n g s t a t u t e . How should t h e p e n a l t y p r o v i s i o n s o f S 39-71-2907, M C A be a p p l i e d t o t h e f o l l o w i n g : ( a ) Temporary t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y b e n e f i t s from t h e d a t e o f i n j u r y on October 6 , 1981 t o J u l y 25, 1983, which were due on J u l y 25, 1983 and n o t p a i d u n t i l a f t e r October 1 1 , 1983. ( b ) Medical b e n e f i t s due on J u l y 25, 1983 and n o t p a i d u n t i l a f t e r October 11, 1983. A s t o ( a ) weekly b e n e f i t s from October 6, 1981 t o J u l y 2 5 , 1983, t h e lower c o u r t found a r e a s o n a b l e e x p l a n a t i o n f o r t h e f a i l u r e t o pay. I t t h e r e f o r e concluded t h a t t h e d e l a y i n payment up t o J u l y 25, 1983 was n o t a p r o p e r b a s i s f o r p e n a l - t y . I n i t s o r d e r o f p a r t i a l summary judgment and i n its s u b s e q u e n t o r d e r d e n y i n g t h e p e t i t i o n f o r r e h e a r i n g , t h e Workers' Compensation C o u r t concluded t h a t t h e p e n a l t y was w a r r a n t e d once t h e S t a t e Fund acknowledged it was l i a b l e f o r compensation b e n e f i t s on J u l y 25, 1983. The c o u r t f u r t h e r concluded t h a t t h e p e n a l t y s h o u l d b e a s s e s s e d on b e n e f i t s which a c c r u e d between J u l y 25, 1983 and O c t o b ~ r 11, 1983. The s t i p u l a t i o n o f t h e p a r t i e s e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t a s o f October 11, 1983, t h e f o l l o w i n g amounts w e r e due from t h e S t a t e Fund t o t h e c l a i m a n t : P a s t due medical expenses $26,048.70 P a s t due temporary t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y 11,979.42 Lump sum advance 5,852.00 Tota 1 $43,880.12 W e d i s r e g a r d t h e lump sum advance of $5,852.00, a s t h a t was n o t a p a s t due p o r t i o n of t h e c l a i m . I t a p p e a r s t h a t s u b s t a n t i a l l y a l l o f t h e medica 1 e x p e n s e s o f $26,048.70 and t h e p a s t due temporary t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y b e n e f i t s o f $11,979.42 w e r e a c t u a l l y due t o t h e c l a i m a n t on J u l y 25, 1983. The lower c o u r t i n c o r r e c t l y assumed t h a t no p a r t o f temporary t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y b e n e f i t s o r m e d i c a l b e n e f i t s a l r e a d y due on J u l y 25, 1983 could b e s u b j e c t t o t h e s t a t u t o - r y p e n a l t y . To t h e e x t e n t t h a t b o t h medical b e n e f i t s and temporary t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y b e n e f i t s due on J u l y 25, 1983 had n o t i n f a c t been p a i d by October 1 1 , 1983, s u c h amounts may b e s u b j e c t t o a p e n a l t y . The amount o f such a p e n a l t y i s t o b e determined by t h e c o u r t a t i t s d i s c r e t i o n under 5 39-71-2907, MCA. The r e c o r d i s n o t s u f f i c i e n t t o a l l o w u s t o d e t e r m i n e t h e e x t e n t o f t h e p e n a l t y as t o e i t h e r medical b e n e f i t s or temporary t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y b e n e f i t s found t o b e due on J u l y 25, 1983. In a d d i t i o n , it would n o t b e a p p r o p r i a t e f o r u s t o a t t e m p t t o make a d e c i s i o n t h a t 5 39-71-2907, MCA, commits t o t h e d i s c r e t i o n o f t h e Workers' Compensation judge. I n r e g a r d t o I s s u e 2 ( a ) and ( b ) , w e remand t h e c a u s e t o t h e Workers' Compensation Court f o r d e t e r m i n a t i o n a s t o t h e e x t e n t o f t h e p e n a l t y , i f any, t o b e charged upon t h o s e b e n e f i t s which w e r e due on J u l y 25, 1983. I11 Did t h e temporary t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y r a t e awarded t h e c l a i m a n t p r o p e r l y i n c l u d e a l l wages earned a t t h e t i m e o f h i s i n j u r y ? O n March 3 , 1983, t h e Workers' Compensation Court en- t e r e d f i n d i n g s o f f a c t , c o n c l u s i o n s o f law and judgment i n Putnam v . Edson E x p r e s s , I n c . , and Home I n s u r a n c e Company. The Edson Express c a s e involved a c l a i m by t h e p r e s e n t claim- a n t f o r a d d i t i o n a l temporary t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y based on i n j u - ries from t h e J a n u a r y 16, 1981 a c c i d e n t , which he claimed had been aggravated by t h e October 6 , 1981 a c c i d e n t . The Work- ers' Compensation Court concluded t h a t c l a i m a n t was n o t t e m p o r a r i l y t o t a l l y d i s a b l e d a s a r e s u l t o f t h e J a n u a r y 1 6 , 1981 a c c i d e n t and t h a t t h e J a n u a r y a c c i d e n t was n o t t h e proximate cause o f c l a i m a n t ' s c u r r e n t c o n d i t i o n . The c o u r t f u r t h e r p o i n t e d o u t t h a t c l a i m a n t had r e c e i v e d temporary t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y b e n e f i t s o f $219 p e r week from J a n u a r y 1 6 , 1981 t o on o r a b o u t November 10, 1981, a t which t i m e t h e temporary t o t a l b e n e f i t s w e r e t e r m i n a t e d by t h e i n s u r a n c e c a r r i e r . The c o u r t n o t e d , "The i n s u r e r h a s c o n t i n u e d t o pay biweekly p a r t i a l compensation b e n e f i t s t o t h e c l a i m a n t a t t h e maximum $109.50 r a t e . " The c o u r t a l s o s p e c i f i e d t h a t t h e e v i d e n c e was i n s u f f i c i e n t t o a l l o w t h e c o u r t t o make a d e t e r - mination o f t h e permanent p a r t i a l d i s a b i l i t y b e n e f i t s t o which t h e c l a i m a n t may be e n t i t l e d . There i s no f u r t h e r e x p l a n a t i o n o f t h e S t a t e Fund 's payment o f p a r t i a l compensa- t i o n b e n e f i t s o f $109.50 from November 1 0 , 1981 t o on o r a b o u t March 3 , 1983. The o r d e r d o e s e s t a b l i s h t h a t t h e r e had been no award o f permanent p a r t i a l d i s a b i l i t y b e n e f i t s . Claimant was i n j u r e d on October 6 , 1981, w h i l e e a r n i n g $6 p e r hour o r $240 p e r week from Leonard N i e l s e n . Claimant s t a t e s t h a t t h i s temporary job was t o l a s t o n l y a few d a y s , and t h a t he began working f o r N e i l s e n i n October 1981 i n o r d e r t o d e t e r m i n e whether he was a g a i n c a p a b l e o f working. Claimant a r g u e s t h a t t h e employment w i t h N i e l s e n was o n l y temporary employment and t h a t h i s permanent employment r a t e was $340 p e r week, which h e had r e c e i v e d w h i l e working f o r Edson Express p r i o r t o January 16, 1981. I n t h e a l t e r n a - t i v e , h e a r g u e s t h a t t h e amount o f $109.50 p e r week compensa- t i o n b e n e f i t s from Home I n s u r a n c e Company should b e added t o t h e Neil-sen weekly wage o f $240. S e c t i o n 39-71-701 ( I ) , MCA, i n p e r t i n e n t p a r t p r o v i d e s : "(1) Weekly compensation b e n e f i t s f o r i n j u r y producing t o t a l temporary d i s a b i l - i t y s h a l l b e 66 2/3% o f t h e wages re- ceived a t t h e t i m e o f t h e i n j u r y . . . ." S e c t i o n 39-71-116, MCA, d e f i n e s "temporary t o t a l d i s a b i l - i t y " and "wages" a s follows: " ( 1 9 ) 'Temporary t o t a l d i s a b i l i t y ' means a c o n d i t i o n r e s u l t i n g from an i n j u r y a s d e f i n e d i n t h i s c h a p t e r t h a t r e s u l t s i n t o t a l l o s s o f wages and e x i s t s u n t i l t h e i n j u r e d worker i s a s f a r r e s t o r e d a s t h e permanent c h a r a c t e r o f t h e i n j u r i e s w i l l p e r m i t . D i s a b i l i t y s h a l l b e supported by a preponderance o f medical evidence. " ( 2 0 ) 'Wages' means t h e a v e r a g e g r o s s e a r n i n g s r e c e i v e d by t h e employee a t t h e t i m e o f t h e i n j u r y f o r t h e u s u a l h o u r s o f employment i n a week, and o v e r t i m e i s n o t t o b e c o n s i d e r e d . . . ." A t t h e t i m e o f t h e October 6 , 1981 a c c i d e n t , c l a i m a n t was r e c e i v i n g a weekly wage o f $240. That amount c o n s t i t u t e s h i s "average g r o s s e a r n i n g s " under t h e s t a t u t e . The f a c t s do n o t demonstrate a r e a s o n f o r c o n c l u d i n g t h a t t h e wages p a i d by a d i f f e r e n t employer n i n e months p r i o r t o t h e p r e s e n t i n j u r y c a n b e c o n s i d e r e d a s t h e a v e r a g e g r o s s e a r n i n g s a t t h e t i m e o f i n j u r y . W e c o n c l u d e t h e r e i s no b a s i s f o r u s i n g t h e $340 p e r week p a i d p r i o r t o J a n u a r y 1 6 , 1 9 8 1 a s t h e p e r m a n e n t employ- ment r a t e f o r c l a i m a n t a t t h e t i m e o f t h e O c t o b e r 6 , 1 9 8 1 a c c i d e n t . C l a i m a n t a r g u e s i n t h e a l t e r n a t i v e t h a t h i s wages a s o f O c t o b e r 6 , 1981 s h o u l d i n c l u d e t h e $109.50 b e i n g p a i d a s p a r t i a l c o m p e n s a t i o n b e n e f i t s by t h e i n s u r a n c e company f o r h i s f o r m e r e m p l o y e r , Edson E x p r e s s . The r e c o r d i s i n c o m p l e t e as t o t h e n a t u r e o f t h e $109.50 payments b e i n g made by H o m e I n s u r a n c e . The amount o f t h e $109.50 payment i s 50% o f t h e 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 o f $219.00, w h i c h was awarded i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e J a n u a r y 1 6 Edson E x p r e s s a c c i d e n t . T h i s s u g g e s t s t h a t s u c h payments may be i n t h e n a t u r e o f permanent p a r t i a l d i s a b i l i t y b e n e f i t payments. C l a i m a n t a r g u e s t h a t t h e $109.50 s h o u l d b e added t o h i s $240.00 w e e k l y wage i n computing t h e 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 t o which h e i s e n t i t l e d f o r t h e O c t o b e r 6 a c c i - d e n t . T h i s t y p e o f s t a c k i n g would n o t b e p r o p e r . It is n o t c o m p a r a b l e t o t h e s t a c k i n g o f wages from c o n c u r r e n t employ- rnent w h i c h h a s b e e n approved i n o t h e r c a s e s . I n t h i s i n - s t a n c e , it would b e u n f a i r t o i n c l u d e t h e $109.50 payments i n t h e w e e k l y wage and p a y 2 / 3 o f t h a t $109.50 a s a p a r t o f t h e 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 , w h i l e t h e c l a i m a n t a t t h e same t i m e r e c e i v e d t h e $109.50 payments from Home I n s u r - a n c e i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e o t h e r a c c i d e n t . W e t h e r e f o r e a f f i r m t h e award 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 y t h e Workers' Compensation C o u r t b a s e d upon t h e a v e r a g e weekly wage o f $240.00. W e remand t h i s c a u s e t o t h e Workers' Compensation C o u r t f o r f u r t h e r a c t i o n i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h i s o p i n i o n . We concur: t