Utah Court of Appeals

Can employers forfeit their right to third-party settlement offsets in workers' compensation cases? Sysco v. Labor Commission Explained

2021 UT App 127
No. 20200634-CA
November 18, 2021
Affirmed

Summary

Paul Roberts was awarded permanent total disability benefits after four work-related automobile accidents. Sysco Corporation sought to offset third-party settlement proceeds Roberts had recovered against the PTD benefits, but failed to raise the offset issue during the benefits adjudication. The Labor Commission determined Sysco had forfeited its right to seek offsets.

Analysis

In Sysco v. Labor Commission, the Utah Court of Appeals addressed whether an employer can forfeit its right to seek third-party settlement offsets against workers’ compensation benefits by failing to raise the issue during the underlying benefits adjudication.

Background and Facts

Paul Roberts sustained injuries in four work-related automobile accidents between 2005 and 2014 while employed by Sysco Corporation. Roberts successfully recovered damages from third parties in civil lawsuits related to three of the accidents and was later awarded permanent total disability benefits by the Labor Commission. During discovery on the PTD claim, Sysco sought information about Roberts’s third-party settlements and filed motions to compel, which the administrative law judge denied. Crucially, Sysco never raised the issue of offsets during the benefits adjudication itself, only filing a motion to compel regarding settlement information after the Commission awarded benefits.

Key Legal Issues

The court addressed two primary issues: (1) whether the Labor Commission had jurisdiction to determine that Sysco forfeited its right to seek offsets, and (2) whether Sysco actually forfeited that right by failing to raise the offset issue during the benefits adjudication.

Court’s Analysis and Holding

The court distinguished between waiver and forfeiture, explaining that forfeiture is the failure to make timely assertion of a right, while waiver is the intentional relinquishment of a known right. The court held that parties have an obligation to raise all issues that could have been presented before the Commission, and those not raised are forfeited. Since Roberts had entered into settlements long before filing his PTD claim, Sysco had the opportunity to raise offset issues during the benefits adjudication but failed to do so. The court rejected Sysco’s argument that its discovery attempts preserved the offset issue.

Practice Implications

This decision underscores the importance of raising all potential offset claims during the initial workers’ compensation proceedings. Employers cannot rely solely on discovery efforts to preserve their rights to third-party settlement offsets. The ruling clarifies that the Labor Commission has fact-finding authority and can adjudicate issues in the first instance, unlike appellate courts. Practitioners should ensure that offset issues are explicitly raised and litigated during the benefits adjudication rather than attempting to pursue them post-award.

Original Opinion

Link to Original Case

Case Details

Case Name

Sysco v. Labor Commission

Citation

2021 UT App 127

Court

Utah Court of Appeals

Case Number

No. 20200634-CA

Date Decided

November 18, 2021

Outcome

Affirmed

Holding

An employer forfeits its right to seek third-party settlement offsets against workers’ compensation benefits when it fails to raise the offset issue during the underlying benefits adjudication.

Standard of Review

Correctness for questions of law, including whether an agency has jurisdiction and whether a party properly raises an issue for adjudication

Practice Tip

Assert all third-party settlement offset claims during the initial workers’ compensation benefits proceeding rather than waiting until after the award is issued.

Need Appellate Counsel?

Lotus Appellate Law handles appeals before the Utah Court of Appeals, Utah Supreme Court, California Court of Appeal, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

Related Court Opinions

    • Utah Court of Appeals

    Bear v. LifeMap Assurance Co.

    November 18, 2021

    An insurance company did not waive the requirement for evidence of insurability merely by receiving premium payments through a third party when it had no knowledge of the specific application or premium increases.
    • Contract Interpretation
    • |
    • Evidence and Admissibility
    Read More
    • Utah Court of Appeals

    Vittoria v. Provo City

    July 18, 2024

    The Governmental Immunity Act of Utah occupies the field regarding timing requirements for claims against governmental entities, precluding the application of Utah Code section 78B-2-303.
    • Governmental Immunity
    • |
    • Standard of Review
    • |
    • Statutory Interpretation
    Read More
About these Decision Summaries

Lotus Appellate Law publishes these summaries to keep practitioners informed — not as legal advice. Each case turns on its own facts. If a decision here is relevant to your matter, we’re happy to discuss it.