Before Justices Douglas, Hardesty, and Parraguirre. Opinion by Justice Douglas.
In an appeal from a district court order denying a petition for judicial review in a worker’s compensation action, the Court considered whether an employer is required to acquire knowledge of any employee’s permanent physical impairment before a subsequent injury in order to qualify for reimbursement from the subsequent injury account for private carriers under NRS 616B.587(4). NRS 616B.587 provides for reimbursement when an employee sustains an injury entitling him or her to compensation for disability that is substantially greater due to the combined effects of a preexisting impairment and the subsequent injury than that which would have resulted from the subsequent injury alone, provided certain conditions are met. The condition at issue in this case was whether the insurer could establish by written records that the Appellant/employer had knowledge of the permanent physical impairment at the time the employee was hired, or that the employee was retained in that employment after learning of the of the impairment. Appellant/employer hired an employee who had a workplace injury in 2003. It was later determined that the employee had a previous permanent physical impairment that occurred more than a decade earlier. DIR denied the request for reimbursement because Appellant did not learn of the earlier injury until after the day after the 2003 injury, and there was no indication that it provided a permanent modified duty or permanent full duty position to the employee. An appeals officer affirmed DIR’s denial on an alternative basis. Ultimately, the Court determined that the language of NRS 616B.587(4) was plain and unambiguous, and consistent with the majority in other jurisdictions having a knowledge requirement, held that an employer must acquire knowledge of an employee's permanent physical impairment before the subsequent injury occurs to qualify for reimbursement from the subsequent injury account for private carriers under NRS 616B.587(4). The Court affirmed the district court’s order denying a petition for judicial review. (Kristen T. Gallagher, Associate in the Las Vegas office of McDonald Carano Wilson).
