Opinion ID: 900347
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Future Benefits

Text: [¶ 7.] This dispute centers on SDCL 62-4-38 and its effect on benefits owed but not yet paid: If an injury for which compensation is payable under this title has been sustained under circumstances creating in some other person than the employer a legal liability to pay damages in respect thereto, the injured employee may, at the employee's option, either claim compensation or proceed at law against such other person to recover damages or proceed against both the employer and such other person. However, in the event the injured employee recovers any like damages from such other person, the recovered damages shall be an offset against any workers' compensation which the employee would otherwise have been entitled to receive. Zoss argues that the reference to like damages disallows  any offset whatsoever where `like damages' have not been recovered. (Emphasis in original). She asserts the $215,000 includes payment for claims not covered by workers' compensation, which, she contends, is limited to employees' earnings based on life expectancy. Therefore, according to Zoss, because the settlement is not broken down by category of damages, it is impossible to ascertain which damages are like, thus rendering SDCL 62-4-38 inapplicable. [¶ 8.] Insurer argues that determining its rights in the $215,000 by looking at the date the settlement proceeds are distributed is illogical and inconsistent. We agree. It is inconsistent to state that as to past benefits paid, Insurer is entitled to dollar-for-dollar reimbursement, but that future benefits are credited only to the extent they constitute like damages. Such a holding would encourage employees to rush to settlement with the third-party tortfeasor in order to reduce the insurer's lien. [¶ 9.] Zoss places undue emphasis on the Legislature's insertion of the word like in the 1994 amendment to SDCL 62-4-38. We interpret statutes in accordance with legislative intent. Intent must be determined from the statute as a whole, as well as enactments relating to the same subject. Where statutes appear to conflict, it is our responsibility to give reasonable construction to both, and if possible, to give effect to all provisions under consideration, construing them together to make them harmonious and workable. In re Certif. of a Question of Law ( Wiersma v. Maple Leaf Farms), 1996 SD 16, ¶ 4, 543 N.W.2d 787, 789 (citations & internal quotations omitted). [¶ 10.] SDCL 62-4-38 through -40 each address a different aspect of reimbursement. SDCL 62-4-38 deals with reimbursement of benefits owed but not yet paid when the employee brings the lawsuit against the third party. SDCL 62-4-39 also applies when the employee initiates the lawsuit and concerns reimbursement for benefits already paid. SDCL 62-4-40 allows the employer to sue the third party for compensation paid or payable: If compensation is awarded under this title, the employer having paid the compensation, or having become liable therefor [1] may collect in his own name or that of the injured employee, or his personal representative, if deceased, from any other person against whom legal liability for damage exists, the amount of such liability and shall hold for the benefit of the injured employee or his personal representative, if deceased, the amount of damages collected in excess of the amount of compensation paid such employee or his representative, less the proportionate necessary and reasonable expense of collecting the same, which expenses may include an attorney's fee not in excess of thirty-five per cent of damages so collected, and shall be subject finally to the approval of the department. (Emphasis added). Neither SDCL 62-4-39 nor -40 provide that benefits already paid are treated differently than benefits payable and we do not accept Zoss' argument that the insertion of like in SDCL 62-4-38 implicates a different result under that statute. [2] It would make no sense to limit the lien on future benefits when the employee sues the third party, but reimburse dollar-for-dollar when the employer brings the suit.