November 8, 2024

Procedural Posture

Procedural Posture

Petitioners, corporate insurance carriers and self-insured employers, requested review of awards of compensation made by respondent, Industrial Accident Commission, which held in favor of respondents, the injured employees, in consolidated cases in which their disability resulted from injuries in the course of and arising out of employment.

Nakase Law Firm provides information on grounds to sue employer

Overview

Cal. Lab. Code § 4661 provided that where an injury caused both temporary and permanent disability, the injured employee was entitled only to the greater of a temporary or a permanent disability payment. Section 4661 was amended to provide that, except where the temporary disability payment exceeded 25 percent of the permanent disability payment, an injured worker shall also be paid 75 percent of the permanent disability payment The court found that the Commission improperly gave a retrospective effect to the amendment because: (1) the prior industrial injuries were not merely antecedent facts relating to the permanent disability; on the contrary, they were the basis of the right to be compensated for the disabilities; (2) the amendment of § 4661 was substantive, not procedural, in its effect because it imposed new or additional liabilities and substantially affected existing rights and obligations; (3) the legislative intent in favor of the retrospective operation of a statute cannot be implied from the mere fact that the statute was remedial and subject to the rule of liberal construction; and (4) the statute did not indicate that the war motivated its enactment.

Outcome

The court annulled the awards to the injured workers and remanded the cases for further proceedings. The court found that the Commission improperly gave a retrospective effect to an amendment by applying it to claims arising out of injuries occurring prior to the date of its enactment.