CompFox AI Summary
This case involves an appeal by the Tennessee Department of Labor, Second Injury Fund, concerning the apportionment of workers' compensation benefits. Robert Burris, a coal miner, suffered a second back injury leading to permanent and total disability. The Chancery Court of Campbell County ordered the Second Injury Fund to pay 70% of the benefits and the employer, Cross Mountain Coal Company, to pay 30%. The Supreme Court addressed whether T.C.A. § 50-6-208 subsection (a) or (b) should govern the apportionment. The Court concluded that subsection (b) applied due to Burris's prior workers' compensation award for permanent disability, making the Second Injury Fund liable for the percentage exceeding 100% combined disability. Consequently, the Supreme Court reversed the trial court's apportionment, holding the Fund liable for 30% and the employer for 70%. However, the Court affirmed the lump sum award for Mr. Burris, recognizing his established need for housing.
Burris v. Cross Mountain Coal Co. is a workers' compensation case decided in Tennessee Supreme Court. This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.
It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in Tennessee Supreme Court.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
This case involves an appeal by the Tennessee Department of Labor, Second Injury Fund, concerning the apportionment of workers' compensation benefits. Robert Burris, a coal miner, suffered a second back injury leading to permanent and total disability. The Chancery Court of Campbell County ordered the Second Injury Fund to pay 70% of the benefits and the employer, Cross Mountain Coal Company, to pay 30%. The Supreme Court addressed whether T.C.A. § 50-6-208 subsection (a) or (b) should govern the apportionment. The Court concluded that subsection (b) applied due to Burris's prior workers' compensation award for permanent disability, making the Second Injury Fund liable for the percentage exceeding 100% combined disability. Consequently, the Supreme Court reversed the trial court's apportionment, holding the Fund liable for 30% and the employer for 70%. However, the Court affirmed the lump sum award for Mr. Burris, recognizing his established need for housing.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.