New Maryland Workers' Compensation Cases


Anderson/Robinson v. Board of Ed. of Montgomery Co. , 192 Md. App. 343, 994 A.2d 507 (2010).

Montgomery County challenged, in this appeal, the Commission's practice of combining multiple permanent disabilities from a single accident, where the result was increased compensation paid to the Claimant. Under normal practice (and as the Court of Special Appeals confirmed), when a Claimant sustains injury to more than one body part, both of which involve a residual permanent disability, the number of weeks associated with each is determined and then added together for a determination of the total compensation due and payable. Montgomery County contended that such combination was inappropriate because it would make it easier for the Claimant to be awarded one second tier permanent disability, as opposed to two first tier permanent disabilities, the result of which is more money for the Claimant. The Court of Special Appeals confirmed the Commission's practice noting that the purpose of the legislature was to compensate the injured worker.

Darby v. Marley Cooling Tower Co. , 190 Md. App. 736; 989 A.2d 1221 (2010).

The case involved the procedures applicable to petitions for judicial review to the Circuit Court from the Workers' Compensation Commission. An Employer filed a petition for judicial review awarding payment of medical bills. The Order also contained a denial of temporary total disability benefits. The Claimant did not file either a separate petition for judicial review or a cross-petition for judicial review, presuming that the temporary total disability issue would be resolved when the Employer's issues were resolved at trial. The Employer then voluntarily dismissed the petition for judicial review (without the Claimant's consent, but by motion and order of court). The Claimant thereafter attempted to proceed with the appeal on the issue of the denied temporary total disability. The Court of Special Appeals ruled that consistent with the Maryland Rules, which provide a procedure for filing a cross-petition for judicial review, the Claimant could not proceed on the Employer's appeal for the issue of temporary total disability. Though a petition for judicial review is a de novo proceeding, being of that nature does not confer a right to the non-appealing party to have the non-appealing party's issues addressed.