|
IN THE WORKERS' COMPENSATION
COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA
2003 MTWCC 43
WCC No. 2003-0794
TIM TAVES, Beneficiary
and Personal
Representative
of the estate of Diane M. Taves
Petitioner
vs.
AIU
Respondent/Insurer.
DECISION AND JUDGMENT DISMISSING
PETITION
Summary:
Surviving spouse brought petition for death benefits alleging that his
wife died as a result of an occupational disease which had been accepted
as compensable while she was still alive. The insurer disputed any causal
connection between the disease and death and denied death benefits. It
now moves to dismiss because the death benefits dispute was not mediated.
Held:
Mediation is mandatory. Prior cases, cited by petitioner, holding that
mediation of a denial of a claim encompasses subjacent issues of the particular
benefits due a claimant are inapposite.
Topics:
Jurisdiction: Mediation.
A denial of death benefits must be mediated prior to petitioning the
Workers' Compensation Court for such benefits. Mediation of temporary
total disability and medical benefits during the decedent's lifetime
does not satisfy the mediation requirements. Burner v. Uninsured
Employers' Fund, 1998 MTWCC 81 and Dunn v. Indemnity Insurance
Company of North America, 2002 MTWCC 38 are distinguished. Those
cases involved denials of liability and merely held that mediation of
the denial encompassed subjacent or subsumed issues regarding the benefits
due on account of the claim. Where a claim has been accepted and benefits
paid during the deceased's lifetime and the request for death benefits
is denied for a lack of causal connection between death and the occupational
disease, that denial is a separate and distinct issue which must be
mediated.
Constitutions, Statutes,
Rules, and Regulations: Montana Code Annotated: section 39-71-2401,
MCA (2001). A denial of death benefits must be mediated prior
to petitioning the Workers' Compensation Court for such benefits. Mediation
of temporary total disability and medical benefits during the decedent's
lifetime does not satisfy the mediation requirements. Burner v.
Uninsured Employers' Fund, 1998 MTWCC 81 and Dunn v. Indemnity
Insurance Company of North America, 2002 MTWCC 38 are distinguished.
Those cases involved denials of liability and merely held that mediation
of the denial encompassed subjacent or subsumed issues regarding the
benefits due on account of the claim. Where a claim has been accepted
and benefits paid during the deceased's lifetime and the request for
death benefits is denied for a lack of causal connection between death
and the occupational disease, that denial is a separate and distinct
issue which must be mediated.
Jurisdiction: Mediation.
Mediation is a jurisdictional prerequisite to filing a petition in the
Workers' Compensation Court.
Constitutions, Statutes,
Rules, and Regulations: Montana Code Annotated: section 39-71-2905,
MCA (2001). Mediation is a jurisdictional prerequisite to filing
a petition in the Workers' Compensation Court.
Constitutions, Statutes,
Rules, and Regulations: Montana Code Annotated: section 39-71-2401,
MCA (2001). Mediation is a jurisdictional prerequisite to filing
a petition in the Workers' Compensation Court.
¶1 AIU moves to dismiss the
petition of Tim Taves (Tim) for death benefits on the ground that the
Court lacks jurisdiction over the petition on account of Tim's failure
to mediate the issues raised in the petition. The motion is well taken.
Factual Background
¶2 Tim Taves is the surviving
husband of Diane M. Taves, who suffered from disabling pulmonary disease
as a result of her employment. Her occupational disease claim was accepted
by AIU and she was receiving temporary total disability benefits at the
time of her death.
¶3 On February 2, 2001, Diane
fell from a horse. She was hospitalized as a result of the fall and ultimately
died on April 30, 2001. Tim, on his own behalf and the Taves' minor child,
Heather Taves, alleges that Diane's occupational pulmonary disease caused
or contributed to her death. AIU disputes the allegation and denies liability.
Discussion
¶4 Mediation of disputes is
required by section 39-71-2401, MCA, which provides in relevant part:
39-71-2401. Disputes
-- jurisdiction -- settlement requirements -- mediation. (1)
A dispute concerning benefits arising under this chapter or chapter
72, other than the disputes described in subsection (2), must be brought
before a department mediator as provided in this part. If a dispute
still exists after the parties satisfy the mediation requirements in
this part, either party may petition the workers' compensation court
for a resolution.
(2) A dispute arising under
this chapter that does not concern benefits or a dispute for which a
specific provision of this chapter gives the department jurisdiction
must be brought before the department.
Mediation of a dispute is a
jurisdictional prerequisite to commencing any action in the Workers' Compensation
Court. Section 39-71-2408(1), MCA, provides:
39-71-2408. Mandatory,
nonbinding mediation. (1) Except as otherwise provided, in
a dispute arising under chapter 71 or 72 of this title, the insurer
and claimant shall mediate any issue concerning benefits and the mediator
shall issue a report following the mediation process recommending a
solution to the dispute before either party may file a petition in the
workers' compensation court.
Section 39-71-2905, MCA, which
is the general grant of jurisdiction to the Workers' Compensation Court,
further provides in relevant part:
39-71-2905. Petition
to workers' compensation judge -- time limit on filing. (1)
A claimant or an insurer who has a dispute concerning any benefits under
chapter 71 of this title may petition the workers' compensation judge
for a determination of the dispute after satisfying dispute resolution
requirements otherwise provided in this chapter.
¶5 Initially, Tim does not
dispute that the claim for death benefits has not been mediated. While
Diane previously mediated disputes concerning temporary total disability
and medical benefits, (see Ex. C to Petitioner's Response to
Respondent's Motion to Dismiss), those mediations occurred during her
lifetime.
¶6 Tim argues that the mediation
requirement has been met because of the prior mediations involving Diane.
He cites this Court's prior decisions in Burner v. Uninsured Employers'
Fund, 1998 MTWCC 81 and Dunn v. Indemnity Insurance Company of
North America, 2002 MTWCC 38. Tim's reading of the holdings in the
two cited cases is erroneous. Both of those cases involved denials of
all liability. The denials were mediated. Since the denials of liability
were total, I held that mediation of the denial encompassed all subjacent
issues, including temporary total disability benefits (Burner)
and permanent partial disability benefits (Dunn). This is not
such a case. The issue of death benefits is not remotely connected to,
subsumed in, or subjacent to the issues previously mediated by Diane during
her lifetime. It is a distinct, new issue arising only upon her death.
It should have been, and must be, mediated before petitioning the Court.
¶7 Finally, I note that Tim's
attorney has filed an affidavit which indicates that the petition was
filed because the limitations period may have been running short. Even
if true, it is not grounds for waiving the mediation requirement. The
mediation provisions do not contain any exception relieving a claimant
of his or her failure to timely seek mediation.
JUDGMENT
¶8 The Workers' Compensation
Court lacks jurisdiction over the dispute alleged in the petition since
it was not mediated as required by section 39-71-2401, MCA. Therefore,
the petition in this matter is dismissed without prejudice.
DATED in Helena, Montana,
this 16th day of June, 2003.
(SEAL)
\s\ MIKE
McCARTER
JUDGE
c: Ms. Sara R. Sexe
Ms. Melanie S. Pfeifer
Submitted: June 11, 2003 |