LaCroix v. Syracuse Executive Air Service, Inc., 9 N.Y.3d 350 (2007)

r
r

Under Workers’ Compensation Law, schedule loss of use awards for permanent partial disability must be paid periodically, not as a lump sum, unless commutation is justified under specific statutory provisions.

r
r

Summary

r

The New York Court of Appeals addressed whether the Workers’ Compensation Board could authorize lump-sum payments for schedule loss of use awards, which compensate for permanent partial disability. Marie LaCroix, a baggage handler, sustained a work-related injury resulting in a 75% loss of use of her left arm. The Board directed the employer’s insurer to pay the schedule loss of use award as a lump sum. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the statute requires periodic payments and that lump-sum payments are only permissible under specific commutation provisions when deemed in the interests of justice. This decision reinforces the legislative intent of consistent income replacement for injured workers.

r
r

Facts

r

r
In November 2002, Marie LaCroix, a baggage handler for Syracuse Executive Air Service, slipped and fell on an iced-over ramp while loading baggage.r
She sustained a fractured left wrist and a torn left rotator cuff.r
The Workers’ Compensation Board determined the injury was work-related and set her average weekly wage at $415.83.r
LaCroix received payments for permanent partial and temporary total disability while her claim was pending.r
The parties stipulated to a 75% loss of use of LaCroix’s left arm.r

r
r

Procedural History

r

r
The Workers’ Compensation Board initially directed the employer’s insurance carrier to pay the schedule loss of use award in a lump sum.r
A panel of the Board affirmed the lump-sum payment, relying on precedent that permanent disability recompenses a claimant for loss of earning capacity without a specific time frame.r
The Appellate Division affirmed, concluding that case law and the Board’s general powers supported the lump-sum payment decision.r
The New York Court of Appeals granted review and reversed the Appellate Division’s order.r

r
r

Issue(s)

r

r
Whether the Workers’ Compensation Law permits the Workers’ Compensation Board to implement a policy of paying schedule loss of use awards as lump sums rather than periodically.r

r
r

Holding

r

r
No, because Workers’ Compensation Law § 25 requires that compensation be paid “periodically,” which precludes a general policy of lump-sum payments for schedule loss of use awards. Lump-sum payments are permissible only under the specific commutation provisions of the statute.r

r
r

Court’s Reasoning

r

r
The Court determined the issue was primarily one of statutory interpretation, warranting less deference to the agency’s interpretation.r
Workers’ Compensation Law § 25 mandates that compensation be paid periodically, similar to wage payments, and specifies bi-weekly payments, with the Board having the discretion to alter the payment period, but not to eliminate the periodic nature of payments.r
The Court stated, “‘Period’ plainly means a division or portion of time. ‘Periodic payment’ means ‘[o]ne of a series of payments made over time instead of a one-time payment for the full amount’.” The Court found that