RENDERED: MARCH 25, 2022; 10:00 A.M.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Commonwealth of Kentucky
Court of Appeals
NO. 2020-CA-0850-WC
TERESA STEWART APPELLANT
PETITION FOR REVIEW OF A DECISION
v. OF THE WORKERS’ COMPENSATION BOARD
ACTION NO. WC-14-69748
GOOD SAMARITAN CENTER;
HONORABLE JONATHAN R.
WEATHERBY, ADMINISTRATIVE
LAW JUDGE; WORKERS’
COMPENSATION BOARD; NORTON
HOSPITAL; EMERGENCY MEDICAL
ASSOCIATES; R. KIRK OWENS, M.D.;
HONORABLE DANIEL CAMERON,
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF KENTUCKY APPELLEES
OPINION
AFFIRMING
** ** ** ** **
BEFORE: CALDWELL, COMBS, AND L. THOMPSON, JUDGES.
THOMPSON, L., JUDGE: Teresa Stewart appeals from an opinion of the
Workers’ Compensation Board which affirmed an order and award of workers
compensation benefits from Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Jonathan Weatherby.
The only issue on appeal is whether Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) 342.730(4)
applies in this case. We hold that it does and affirm.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Appellant suffered a work-related injury in 2014 while working for
Good Samaritan Center. An ALJ found her injury compensable and that she had a
permanent partial disability. This finding is not in dispute. In 2016, Good
Samaritan moved to reopen the workers’ compensation claim in order to contest
the compensability of a specific surgery recommended for Appellant. Appellant
also moved to reopen her claim in order to determine if her physical condition had
worsened since the time of her initial award. Both motions were granted and the
claim was reopened.
After introducing additional evidence into the record, ALJ Weatherby
concluded that the surgery being contested by Good Samaritan was compensable
and was a necessary treatment for Appellant’s work injury. The ALJ also held that
Appellant was now permanently and totally disabled. Finally, the ALJ held that
Appellant’s benefits would terminate pursuant to the current version of KRS
342.730(4). KRS 342.730(4) states:
-2-
All income benefits payable pursuant to this chapter shall
terminate as of the date upon which the employee reaches
the age of seventy (70), or four (4) years after the
employee’s injury or last exposure, whichever last
occurs. In like manner all income benefits payable
pursuant to this chapter to spouses and dependents shall
terminate as of the date upon which the employee would
have reached age seventy (70) or four (4) years after the
employee’s date of injury or date of last exposure,
whichever last occurs.
Appellant appealed the application of the current version of KRS
342.730(4) to the Board. Appellant argued an older version of KRS 342.730(4),
which was in effect at the time of her injury, should apply and that the new version
should not apply retroactively to her award. She also raised constitutional issues.
The Board held that the new version of KRS 342.730(4) did apply retroactively to
her award, but it was without jurisdiction to determine constitutional issues. This
appeal followed.
ANALYSIS
Appellant argues on appeal that the current version of KRS
342.730(4) should not apply retroactively to her award, that the application of the
current version of KRS 342.730(4) violates the Contracts Clause of the United
States Constitution and the Kentucky Constitution, and that the application of the
current version of KRS 342.730(4) would be an arbitrary act contrary to Section 2
of the Kentucky Constitution.
-3-
These issues have all recently been ruled upon by the Kentucky
Supreme Court. Holcim v. Swinford, 581 S.W.3d 37, 44 (Ky. 2019), holds that
KRS 342.730(4) can be applied retroactively to claims and awards that were still
open at the time the new version came into effect. Appellant’s claim was still open
when the current version came into effect; therefore, the ALJ and Board properly
applied that statute. Holcim determines this issue. In addition, Dowell v. Matthews
Contracting, 627 S.W.3d 890, 894-95 (Ky. 2021), holds that applying KRS
342.730(4) retroactively does not violate the Contracts Clause of the United States
Constitution or Kentucky Constitution. Finally, Cates v. Kroger, 627 S.W.3d 864,
871-72 (Ky. 2021), holds that applying KRS 342.730(4) retroactively is not an
arbitrary act.
CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, we affirm the application of the current
version of KRS 342.730(4) to Appellant’s benefits. The Kentucky Supreme Court
has recently ruled on the issues raised by Appellant and has definitively found that
the current version is to be applied retroactively to claims such as Appellant’s and
that the statute is constitutional.
ALL CONCUR.
-4-
BRIEF FOR APPELLANT: BRIEF FOR APPELLEE GOOD
SAMARITAN CENTER:
Wayne C. Daub
Louisville, Kentucky Patrick J. Murphy, II
Amanda L. Combs
F. Allon Bailey
Lexington, Kentucky
BRIEF FOR APPELLEE DANIEL
CAMERON, ATTORNEY
GENERAL:
Matthew F. Kuhn
Brett R. Nolan
Alexander Y. Magera
Frankfort, Kentucky
-5-