Where there is a specific incident at work causing an injury, calculating the statute of limitations to file a workers’ compensation claim is relatively straightforward. However, when an employee contracts an occupational disease during his or her employment, determining whether a claim is time-barred is more complicated. An Ohio Court of Appeals recently addressed this issue in Weisenauer v. American Standard, Inc. (Ohio App 3rd Dist. 2014), 2014-Ohio-1569.
In Weisenauer, it was undisputed that the claimant had developed silicosis in the course of and arising out of his employment with American Standard. He was diagnosed with the condition on November 26, 2007 and continued working for the company, without missing any time on account of the disease, until his plant was closed in December of 2007. On November 3, 2010, the claimant filed a workers’ compensation claim. American Standard contested his claim, arguing that it was time-barred by the statute of limitations set out in ORC 4123.85. Administratively, it was determined that the claim was timely filed and American Standard filed a court appeal.
The trial court granted American Standard’s Motion for Summary Judgment and another appeal was filed. The Court of Appeals first outlined ORC 4123.85’s mandate that occupational disease claims are time-barred unless filed 1) within two years after the disability due to the disease began, or 2) within such longer period not to exceed six months after diagnosis of the occupational disease. The Court addressed whether the claimant had filed his claim within two years of the onset of his “disability” by first discussing an Ohio Supreme Court case which adopted the following definition of “disability” for purposes of ORC 4123.85: 1) the date on which the claimant first became aware through medical diagnosis that he was suffering from the disease, 2) the date on which he first received medical treatment for the disease, or 3) the date claimant first quit work on account of the disease, whichever date is latest. White v. Mayfield (1988), 37 Ohio St.3d 11.
The Court then concluded that the claimant never actually quit work due to his occupational disease, so his claim was not time-barred. The Court rejected American Standard’s argument that the claimant would never have been able to “quit” under this rationale because his plant closed. It found that there was no evidence that the claimant would be eligible to later rejoin the workforce and would then quit due to his disease. The Court insisted that if the last disability element never occurred, the statute of limitations has not yet begun to run.
When an occupational disease claim is filed, employers should closely examine the date of diagnosis, the date of first treatment, and the date of disability due to the disease. Employers should be aware that occupational disease claims can be filed well after the date of diagnosis and will not necessarily be time-barred if the claimant did not miss work because of the disease.