Bieber v. Keeler Brass Co. - 209 Mich. App. 597, 531 N.W.2d 803 (1995)

Rule:

The last sentence of § 381(1) of the Worker's Disability Compensation Act (act) applies when an employee claims benefits other than worker's compensation benefits. Under these circumstances an extension of time to file a claim for worker's compensation benefits may become necessary if no claim for worker's compensation benefits has yet been made by the employee. The tolling provision of the last sentence of § 381(1) then becomes operative while the employee receives the benefits. It is irrelevant if the employer nevertheless provides worker's compensation benefits on its own; in that case, the last sentence still applies where the employee has not made a claim for worker's compensation benefits. But if an employee claims worker's compensation benefits in a timely fashion, i.e. within the two-year time period, the last sentence of § 381(1) is unnecessary and does not apply, because the claim for benefits under the act has been made and the right to benefits preserved. 

Facts:

John Barnard was injured in the course of his employment on September 18, 1985. Barnard immediately was provided with medical treatment and did not return to work until February 4, 1986. One or two days after Barnard was injured he requested worker's compensation benefits, which were voluntarily paid until Barnard returned to work. Subsequently, Barnard missed another period of work during which worker's compensation benefits were again voluntarily paid. Barnard again returned to work and performed light work until his last day of work on December 4, 1987, when Barnard was laid off in connection with a plant closing. Barnard applied for benefits on April 2, 1990, more than two years after his last day of work.

Edward Bieber was injured on August 13, 1984. He claimed worker's compensation benefits, which were voluntarily paid until May 23, 1985. In the interim, Bieber was injured in a nonwork-related automobile accident. Bierber never returned to work for Keeler Brass Company. He filed an application for benefits on February 16, 1988, more than two years after his last day of work in August 1984.

The Worker's Compensation Appellate Commission (WCAC) affirmed a magistrate's decision dismissing Edward Bieber, Jr.'s petition for benefits under § 381(1) for failure to file a second claim within two years after he last worked. On the other hand, the WCAC affirmed a magistrate's decision, finding that John Barnard was not barred under § 381(1) from receiving benefits under similar facts.

Issue:

Do plaintiffs Bieber and Barnard need to institute more than one claim for worker’s compensation benefits to preserve the right to those benefits at a future date?

Answer:

No.

Conclusion:

On the facts of these two cases, there was no need to extend the period to make a claim for worker's compensation benefits, because the timely claims already had been made within the two-year period. To interpret the statute as defendants argue would lead to extending a period for making a claim when the claim has already been made and no extension is needed. As noted, in these cases plaintiffs satisfied the two-year claim requirements of § 381(1) by making claims for worker's compensation benefits well within two years of the occurrence of their injuries, and the statute does not require plaintiffs to make an additional claim for worker's compensation benefits even though they received prior worker's compensation benefits on account of their injuries. Under these circumstances, a claim might not be litigated until more than two years after the injury.