{"disclaimer":"This is a summary of public court records and is not legal advice. Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.","party":{"slug":"treasurer-of-the-state-of-missouri-as-custodian-of-the-second-injury-fund-respondent","displayName":"TREASURER OF THE STATE OF MISSOURI AS CUSTODIAN OF THE SECOND INJURY FUND, Respondent-","totalCases":3},"cases":[{"caseId":"moappsd:sd36471:2020-04-14","opinionId":"3afab18f-c404-597e-9298-89623f0f35e2","slug":"lisa-coffer-claimant-appellant-v-treasurer-of-the-state-of-missouri-as-cu-d36471","caseName":"LISA COFFER, Claimant-Appellant\nvs.\nTREASURER OF THE STATE OF MISSOURI AS CUSTODIAN OF THE SECOND INJURY FUND, Respondent-Respondent","caseNumber":"SD36471","court":"moappsd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District","decisionDate":"2020-04-14","year":2020,"display_summary":"Lisa Coffer was awarded permanent total disability benefits by an administrative law judge (ALJ) against the Second Injury Fund due to an occupational disease combined with previous disabilities. The Labor and Industrial Relations Commission reversed the ALJ's award, applying a different statutory subsection. The appellate court reversed the Commission's decision, holding that the Supreme Court's interpretation in Cosby v. Treasurer of the State of Missouri required the application of section 287.220.2, not 287.220.3, because Coffer's occupational disease occurred before January 1, 2014, despite her claim being filed after that date. The case was remanded with instructions to reinstate the ALJ's award.","primaryTopic":"workers-compensation","topicSlugs":["workers-compensation","administrative-law","appellate-procedure"],"outcomeNorm":"mixed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=154835","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/lisa-coffer-claimant-appellant-v-treasurer-of-the-state-of-missouri-as-cu-d36471","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"personal-injury","label":"Personal Injury","href":"/practice-areas/personal-injury","score":20,"source":"tag","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/personal-injury"},{"slug":"workers-compensation","label":"Workers' Compensation","href":"/practice-areas/workers-compensation","score":18,"source":"topic","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/workers-compensation"},{"slug":"litigation","label":"Civil Litigation","href":"/practice-areas/litigation","score":12,"source":"topic","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/litigation"}],"role":"respondent"},{"caseId":"moappsd:sd35694:2019-06-20","opinionId":"06d53646-c6ce-5354-8d69-829b9a5a8504","slug":"phillip-guinn-claimant-appellant-v-treasurer-of-the-state-of-missouri-as-d35694","caseName":"PHILLIP GUINN, Claimant-Appellant\nvs.\nTREASURER OF THE STATE OF MISSOURI AS CUSTODIAN OF THE SECOND INJURY FUND, Respondent-Respondent","caseNumber":"SD35694","court":"moappsd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District","decisionDate":"2019-06-20","year":2019,"display_summary":"Phillip Guinn appealed the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission's denial of his claim for Second Injury Fund benefits for hearing loss and tinnitus, which the Commission found time-barred. Guinn suffered hearing loss and tinnitus from industrial noise exposure at Solo Cup Company. The Commission concluded the statute of limitations began running on the date Guinn filed his claim against Solo Cup, or the date of last exposure. The appellate court reversed and remanded, holding that the statute of limitations for occupational diseases, including hearing loss and tinnitus, begins when the injury is reasonably discoverable and apparent, not necessarily the date of last exposure, and that the Commission misapplied the law.","primaryTopic":"workers-compensation","topicSlugs":["workers-compensation","administrative-law","appellate-procedure","standard-of-review","civil-procedure"],"outcomeNorm":"mixed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=141374","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/phillip-guinn-claimant-appellant-v-treasurer-of-the-state-of-missouri-as-d35694","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"employment","label":"Employment Law","href":"/practice-areas/employment","score":20,"source":"tag","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/employment"},{"slug":"workers-compensation","label":"Workers' Compensation","href":"/practice-areas/workers-compensation","score":12,"source":"topic","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/workers-compensation"},{"slug":"litigation","label":"Civil Litigation","href":"/practice-areas/litigation","score":12,"source":"topic","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/litigation"}],"role":"respondent"},{"caseId":"moappsd:sd35637:undated","opinionId":"620977ec-88e2-5cc9-a110-c28ab8ef69b8","slug":"vernis-farmer-claimant-appellant-v-treasurer-of-the-state-of-missouri-as-d35637","caseName":"VERNIS FARMER, Claimant-Appellant\nvs.\nTREASURER OF THE STATE OF MISSOURI AS CUSTODIAN OF THE SECOND INJURY FUND, Respondent-Respondent","caseNumber":"SD35637","court":"moappsd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District","decisionDate":null,"year":2018,"display_summary":null,"primaryTopic":null,"topicSlugs":[],"outcomeNorm":"affirmed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=134595","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/vernis-farmer-claimant-appellant-v-treasurer-of-the-state-of-missouri-as-d35637","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"criminal-law","label":"Criminal Law","href":"/practice-areas/criminal-law","score":20,"source":"tag","url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/criminal-law"}],"role":"respondent"}]}