In the Matter of Charles D. Scott

SYLLABUS
 

(This syllabus is not part of the opinion of the Court. It has been prepared by the Office of the Clerk for the convenience of the reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Supreme Court. Please note that, in the interests of brevity, portions of any opinion may not have been summarized).

In the Matter of Charles D. Scott (A-6-99)

 
(NOTE: The Court wrote no full opinion in this case. Rather, the Court's opinion is based substantially on the opinion expressed by Judge Stern in the Appellate Division.)

Argued February 1, 2000 -- Decided March 1, 2000

PER CURIAM

The issue raised in this appeal is whether entitlement to workers' compensation benefits for part-time work precludes recovery of temporary disability benefits for full-time employment.

Charles D. Scott was employed by Konica Business Machines (KBM) as a copier technician from April 2, 1988 through April 7, 1997 at a final weekly salary of $523.50. Scott was also employed on a part-time basis for Holiday Bowl, Inc. (HB) from March 1994 through April 6, 1997 as a desk attendant. On average, Scott earned $208.25 weekly at HB. On October 28, 1995, Scott suffered a crush injury to his hand while working for HB. Scott had reconstructive surgery on his hand on April 8, 1997 and was unable to work at either job through July 15, 1997. Scott was able to return to work on July 16, 1997. Scott received $145.77 per week as a temporary settlement from HB's workers' compensation carrier and was to receive compensation benefits of 66.15 weeks at $125 per week as he had permanent residual injury from this work-related incident.

Scott sought temporary disability benefits under the insurance plan held by his full-time employer, KBM. KBM's disability carrier opposed the payment of any temporary disability benefits from its private plan, claiming that those benefits are payable only for injuries that are not compensable under the Workers' Compensation Act. Since Scott obtained workers' compensation benefits under the Act, he could not collect temporary disability benefits. A private hearing plan officer of the Board of Review found that Scott had suffered an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment with HB, which resulted in his inability to perform his full-time job duties at KBM. The hearing officer declared Scott ineligible to receive disability benefits in light of the Workers' Compensation Act's statutory provisions precluding duplication of benefits.

Scott appealed from the private plan hearing officer's determination that he was ineligible for disability benefits under KBM's private plan. The Appellate Division reversed the decision of the hearing officer, finding neither logical support nor empirical evidence that the Legislature intended to deprive a worker who pays deductions for temporary disability benefits from obtaining those benefits to compensate him for a loss of income at his full-time job merely because his injury occurred at a second or part-time job taken to supplement that income. Pursuant to the determination of the hearing officer, Scott would have received less benefits than he would have received had he worked only at KBM and incurred the same injury in a non-work related event. The Appellate Division reasoned that an employee should not be placed in a worse position because the accident, not related to his full-time employment and therefore otherwise entitling him to temporary disability benefits through that employer, happened to occur at an unrelated part-time work site.

The Appellate Division declined to address the question of whether the disability carrier should be entitled to a set-off to the extent of the temporary benefits obtained through workers' compensation. The panel was of the view that it could not make any determination in the absence of a record below addressed to that important issue. The Appellate Division remanded the matter to the Board of Review for further proceedings consistent with its opinion.

The Supreme Court granted certification.

HELD: The decision of the Appellate Division is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed in the written opinion of the Appellate Division. An employee's entitlement to workers' compensation benefits for injuries sustained during part-time employment does not preclude recovery of temporary disability benefits for his full-time employment.
 
CHIEF JUSTICE PORITZ and JUSTICES O'HERN, STEIN, COLEMAN, LONG, VERNIERO and LAVECCHIA join in this PER CURIAM opinion. SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY
A- 6 September Term 1999

IN THE MATTER OF

CHARLES D. SCOTT

Argued February 1, 2000-- Decided March 1, 2000

On certification to the Superior Court, Appellate Division, whose opinion is reported at 321 N.J. Super. 60 (1999).

Rosalind E. Asch argued the cause for appellants Konica Business Machines and Zurich-American Insurance Group (Jones, Jones, Gluck, Larkin & O'Connell, attorneys).

Paul A. Schwartz argued the cause for respondent, Charles D. Scott, (Goldstein, Ballen, O'Rourke & Wildstein, attorneys).

Ellen A. Reichart, Deputy Attorney General, submitted a brief on behalf of amicus curiae, State of New Jersey, Department of Labor, Board of Review (John J. Farmer, Jr., Attorney General of New Jersey, attorney, Mary C. Jacobson, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel).

PER CURIAM
The judgment is affirmed, substantially for the reasons expressed in Judge Stern's opinion of the Appellate Division, reported at 321 N.J. Super. 60 (1999).
CHIEF JUSTICE PORITZ and JUSTICES O'HERN, STEIN, COLEMAN, LONG, VERNIERO, and LaVECCHIA join in this opinion.

SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY
 

NO. A-6

SEPTEMBER TERM 1999
ON APPEAL FROM
ON CERTIFICATION TO Appellate Division, Superior Court

IN THE MATTER OF

CHARLES D. SCOTT

DECIDED March 1, 2000 Chief Justice Poritz

PRESIDING
OPINION BY PER CURIAM
CONCURRING OPINION BY DISSENTING OPINION BY
CHECKLIST
AFFIRM CHIEF JUSTICE PORITZ X JUSTICE O'HERN X JUSTICE STEIN X JUSTICE COLEMAN X JUSTICE LONG X JUSTICE VERNIERO X JUSTICE LaVECCHIA X TOTALS
7