Opinion ID: 865097
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Mississippi Workers’ Compensation Act

Text: ¶8. The Mississippi Workers’ Compensation Act grants to a workers’ compensation insurer the statutory right to reimbursement of benefits paid an injured worker in the event the worker recovers from a responsible third party. The pertinent portion of the statute provides: [A]ny amount recovered by the injured employee or his dependents (or legal representative) from a third party shall be applied as follows: reasonable costs 2 In denying this motion, the circuit court relied on an unpublished opinion from the Hinds County Circuit Court, which cited an Arkansas Supreme Court case, General Accident Insurance Co. of America v. Jaynes, 33 S.W.3d 161 (Ark. 2000). 3 of collection as approved and allowed by the court in which such action is pending, or by the commission of this state in case of settlement without suit, shall be deducted; the remainder, or so much thereof as is necessary, shall be used to dis charge the legal liability of the employer or insurer; and any excess shall belong to the injured employee or his dependents. Miss. Code Ann. § 71-3-71 (Rev. 2000) (emphasis added). ¶9. Thus, the statute unambiguously provides that, after deducting the costs of collection and attorneys’ fees, any recovery from a third party (whether by award or through settlement) must be applied first to repay the workers’ compensation insurer for benefits it paid the claimant. This Court, stating the statute must be strictly interpreted according to its mandatory language, has uniformly and consistently applied the statute and required reimbursement. See, e.g., Miss. Power Co. v. Jones, 369 So. 2d 1381, 1387 (Miss. 1979) (“The statute is plain and unambiguous.”); Litton Sys., Inc. v. Murphree, 301 So. 2d 850, 852- 53 (Miss. 1974) (statute means “exactly what it says; that is, that the employer and insurer are entitled to recover compensation paid.”); Merchants Co. v. Hutchinson, 199 So. 2d 813, 815 (Miss. 1967) (“Mississippi law is clear and unambiguous on the procedure to be followed by the employer or its insurer in intervening or joining in the cause of action. It is equally clear and unambiguous in setting forth the mandatory distribution to be made of any amount recovered.”). ¶10. Clearly, the requirements for application of Section 71-3-71 are met by the facts of this case: Federated paid workers’ compensation benefits to McNeal pursuant to the Mississippi workers’ compensation statutes, and McNeal recovered money from the third-party defendants. Thus, the money recovered by McNeal from the defendants, after deducting collection and attorneys’ fees, must next be used to reimburse the workers’ compensation 4 provider. Therefore, McNeal is statutorily required to reimburse Federated for the workers’ compensation benefits it paid him.