Posts

Showing posts with the label settlement

Supreme Court Guts Discovery Rule in Traumatic Event Cases; Finds that Settlement with Second Injury Fund Does Not Bar Action Against Employer

Tweeten dba Tweeten Farms v. Tweeten , 999 N.W.2d 270 (Iowa Dec. 22, 2023) In this action reviewing the district court decision, three issues were presented: Does the statutory bar under section 85.39(9) of the Code preclude further benefits following a compromise settlement between claimant and the Second Injury Fund? Does the discovery rule toll the statute of limitations following amendments to section 85.26(1) of the Iowa Code? How do amendments to section 85.39(2) of the Code affect reimbursement for independent medical exams?           The Supreme Court concluded that a compromise settlement with the Fund does not bar an action against the employer.  The Court further finds that, in actions based on a traumatic event, the legislative changes to 85.26(1) made in 2017 effectively eliminates the discovery rule.  Because of the decision on this third issue, the final issue concerning independent medical evaluations was not re...

Court of Appeals Affirms Ruling Denying New Benefits and Reducing Payment for IME

Pesicka v. Snap-On Logistics Co ., No. 19-1759 (App. July 21, 2021) involved a claim in which claimant initially suffered an injury resulting in a 13% impairment to his right leg, settled by the parties on an agreement for settlement basis.  Subsequent to the settlement agreement, claimant underwent eight additional surgeries, including surgeries to amputate all of the toes on his right foot.  Claimant filed a review-reopening action.  Claimant's IME physician found that claimant had established a 36% right foot impairment, which was equivalent to a 25% right lower extremity impairment.  Claimant was also found to  have a 5% impairment of the left knee.   At hearing, the hearing report indicated that the parties stipulated that the impairment was an impairment to the right leg  Claimant's counsel, however, also argued at hearing that claimant should receive a minimum of 100 weeks of benefits due to the valuations for the loss of all of his toes. T...