You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘settlement agreement’ tag.

Beginning July 1, 2017, all Department of Workers’ Claims (DWC) submissions must be made in electronic format via the DWC’s Litigation Managment System (LMS).  However, due to the ongoing development of the capacity of the LMS to receive and process settlement agreements in electronic format, the DWC will continue, until further notice, to accept Form 110 Settlement Agreements in paper format subsequent to July 1, 2017.

Advertisements

Central Baptist Hospital v. May, No. 2014-CA-001228-WC (Ky.App. 2014) (not to be published): The ALJ has the discretion to determine whether a settlement agreement is in the best interests of the claimant and whether it constitutes a true meeting of the minds.

In June of 2012, claimant May sustained a herniated disc at T8-T9.  The case was fully litigated.  A hearing took place on June 12, 2013, but a week before the hearing, the claimant submitted reports of two physicians.  Proof was then extended two weeks beyond the hearing to allow the employer to cross-examine the witnesses.

rabit from aiwlThe case stood submitted on June 25, 2013, but the employer did not cross-examine the witnesses.  On July 24, 2013, the employer submitted a proposed settlement agreement to claimant.  Claimant requested a longer period of TTD to be paid under the agreement and submitted proof of such to the employer’s counsel on August 13, 2013. The employer submitted a revised agreement to claimant on September 4, 2013.  The ALJ issued an opinion on September 11, 2013 (before the agreement was signed) awarding PPD benefits with application of the x3 factor under KRS 342.730(1)(c)(1).

On September 13, 2013, without knowledge of the ALJ’s decision, the claimant signed the revised agreement. (NOTE:  She had previously signed it on September 12, 2013, but did so on the wrong line and, further, due to her attorney’s illness had not had a change to fully discuss the terms of the agreement.) On September 16, 2013, the agreement was forwarded to the ALJ.  Soon thereafter the employer filed a motion and affidavit to set aside the September 11, 2013 opinion and to enforce the settlement agreement.

On rehearing, the ALJ determined there was no meeting of the minds, essentially because claimant was not aware of the settlement agreement at the time she signed it.

The employer appealed arguing, among other issues, that the ALJ should have approved the settlement agreement.  The Workers Compensation Board and the Court of Appeals affirmed deferring to the ALJ’s factual determination that the claimant never truly assented to the agreement.

dwclogo1The following is an announcement from the Chief Administrative Law Judge of the Kentucky Department of Workers’ Claims regarding scanned settlement agreements:

Subject: Scanned documents submitted for approval

It has come to our attention that certain employer representatives are submitting for approval by ALJs Forms 110 which do not contain original signatures. Apparently several of these employer representatives have “gone paperless.” When a Form 110 that has been executed by the plaintiff’s side is sent for the signature of the employer representative, the form is electronically scanned and then the original is immediately destroyed. The scanned document bearing the scanned signature of the plaintiff, and in some instances counsel for plaintiff, is then signed by the employer representative and forwarded on for approval. In some instances the employer representative signs the settlement agreement before it is scanned and then destroys the original document after scanning, resulting in none of the signatures on the settlement agreement being original signatures.

The Commissioner has instructed me to notify all employees of the Department of Workers Claims that no settlement agreement can be approved if it does not bear the original signature of all parties to the agreement. Any such agreements presented for approval shall be returned with the explanation that original signatures of all parties to the agreement are required for approval by an ALJ.

J. Landon Overfield
Chief Administrative Law Judge
Kentucky Department of Workers’ Claims
657 Chamberlin Avenue
Frankfort, KY 40601
Phone: 502-564-5550
Fax: 502-564-0682

Awards

Elsewhere online

Archives

Law & Legal Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory Blog Directory for
Lexington, KY Blog directory Blogio.net blog directory
© 2009 ROLAND LEGAL PLLC. All Rights Reserved