Opinion ID: 1542384
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Bush v. Kauffman & Minteer, Inc.

Text: Norman Bush died on February 1, 2002, from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease contracted as a result of his employment with Kauffman & Minteer, Inc. At the time of his death, his average gross weekly wages were $419.40 and his only surviving dependent was his wife, Audrey Bush (Bush). She filed a claim for death benefits in May 2002, seeking compensation at the statutory rate of fifty percent of her late husband's wages, for a weekly payment of $209.70. See N.J.S.A. 34:15-13(a) (2003). Despite its initial denial, Kauffman & Minteer later conceded that the claim was compensable, leaving the retroactive application of the amendment as the only disputed issue. On December 22, 2004, a different judge of compensation reached the opposite conclusion from that articulated by the judge who had decided the Cruz and Hohl petitions. That judge, in granting Bush's petition, concluded that the amendment should be applied retroactively. The judge found that Bush's employer had presented no evidence that manifest injustice would result from a retroactive application of the amendment. Moreover, the judge reasoned that the Legislature's use of the phrase except as hereinafter provided in the amended statutory language, was a reference to a timeframe that conveys the [L]egislature's explicit reminder that the [L]egislature establishes the applicable calculation of dependency benefits and can change such in the future. Bush was therefore awarded death benefits at a rate of seventy percent of her late husband's wages, beginning on January 14, 2004, the effective date of the statutory amendment, and continuing thereafter. Kauffman & Minteer filed its notice of appeal on April 27, 2005.