Tennessee § 50-6-306 - Statute of limitations.

§ 50-6-306. Statute of limitations.

The right to compensation for an occupational disease or a claim for death benefits as a result of an occupational disease shall be forever barred, unless a claim is initiated pursuant to § 50-6-203; provided, however, that the applicable time limitation period or periods shall commence as of the date of the beginning of the incapacity for work resulting from an occupational disease or upon the date death results from the occupational disease; provided, further, that if upon the date of the death of the employee the employee's claim has become barred, the claim of the employee's dependent or dependents shall likewise be barred, and in that case the claim shall be barred whether or not the employer gives the notice required by § 50-6-224(2) [Applicable only to injuries occurring prior to July 1, 2014. See the Compiler's Notes.]. A claim for benefits or death due to coal worker's pneumoconiosis shall be timely filed if the claim is instituted pursuant to § 50-6-203 within three (3) years of the discovery of total disability or the date of death, as the case may be. Acts 1947, ch. 139, § 1; C. Supp. 1950, § 6852; Acts 1971, ch. 300, § 7; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 50-1108; Acts 2004, ch. 962, § 21. Compiler's Notes. Acts 2004, ch. 962, § 42 provided that: The general assembly recognizes that significant cost savings will result from the implementation of this bill. It is in the best interest of the citizens of Tennessee that the cost savings be passed to the entities that have paid faithfully workers' compensation premiums in order to ensure the economic well-being of their employees. It is the intent and purpose of the general assembly that workers' compensation premiums be adjusted downward within fifteen (15) months of July 1, 2004, to reflect the cost savings resulting from the provisions of the act. If a workers' compensation policy is subject to renewal during such fifteen (15) month period, adjustments to the policy may be made at such time. It is the intent of the general assembly that the savings of the act shall routinely be reflected in future filings through the advisory prospective loss cost filing system, pursuant to §§ 56-5-106(b) and 50-6-402. Nothing in this section shall be construed as amending or affecting the procedures for filing and approval of rates set forth in title 56, chapter 5. Acts 2004, ch. 962, § 51 provided in part, that § 21 shall apply to accidents or injuries occurring on or after January 1, 2005. Acts 2013, ch. 289, § 59, effective July 1, 2014, amends § 50-6-224 , referred to in this section, by deleting it in its entirety. However, pursuant to § 50-6-101 , as amended by Acts 2013, ch. 289, § 3, effective July 1, 2014, all claims having a date of injury prior to July 1, 2014, shall be governed by prior law. Thus, § 50-6-224 remains in effect as to injuries occurring prior to July 1, 2014. Textbooks. Tennessee Jurisprudence, 26 Tenn. Juris., Workers' Compensation, § 25. Law Reviews. Workmen's Compensation for Radiation Injuries in Tennessee (E. Blythe Stason), 19 Vand. L. Rev. 571 (1966). Workers' Compensation Appeals Board Decisions. An employee's surviving spouse filed a petition for death benefits following the employee's death, which was caused by diseases she alleged were the result of his employment. The employer denied the claim, asserting the statute of limitations had expired, thus extinguishing the surviving spouse's claim for benefits. The trial court found there were disputed issues of material fact with respect to when the employee became incapacitated from working and denied the motion for summary judgment. On appeal, the employer maintained that the employee's statute of limitations for seeking benefits began to run when he knew or should have known he had a compensable claim, which it asserted was the date he received benefits from the federal government. Because more than one year passed between the receipt of those benefits and the filing of the petition for death benefits, the employer contended the employee's surviving spouse was barred from receiving benefits. In order to accept the employer's position and reverse the trial court's decision and dismiss the case, the Board would have to conclude that the assignment of a medical impairment rating or the receipt of compensation for an impairment rating is conclusive proof that an injured or ill worker has been incapacitated from working. It declined to adopt such a bright-line rule. While an injured worker's anatomical impairment rating is a relevant factor to consider, the impairment rating alone does not establish that an employee is incapacitated from working. Furthermore, questions involving the commencement of the running of the statute of limitations in workers' compensation cases most often are factual in nature, and thus summary judgment should be entered cautiously. The decision of the trial court was affirmed. Morgan v. Lockheed Martin Corporation, 2019 TN Wrk Comp App Bd LEXIS 76.