CompFox AI Summary
McKamey was awarded total and permanent disability benefits for coal workers' pneumoconiosis contracted while working for Pee Wee Mining Company, a judgment affirmed by the appellate court. The trial court found McKamey's 100% disability arose from his employment with Pee Wee Mining Company, independent of any prior injuries. The Second Injury Fund was absolved of liability because the employer had no prior knowledge of McKamey's previous disabilities, and Pee Wee Mining Company was solely responsible for the total disability. Pee Wee Mining Company appealed, contesting the trial judge's refusal to grant credit for McKamey's previous 60% disability award under § 50-1007 T. C.A. The appellate court upheld the trial court's decision, deeming the credit provision of the statute vague, potentially unconstitutional, and inconsistent with the liberal construction of workmen’s compensation law, thereby affirming the initial judgment.
McKamey v. Pee Wee Mining Co. is a workers' compensation case decided in Tennessee Supreme Court. This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.
It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in Tennessee Supreme Court.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
McKamey was awarded total and permanent disability benefits for coal workers' pneumoconiosis contracted while working for Pee Wee Mining Company, a judgment affirmed by the appellate court. The trial court found McKamey's 100% disability arose from his employment with Pee Wee Mining Company, independent of any prior injuries. The Second Injury Fund was absolved of liability because the employer had no prior knowledge of McKamey's previous disabilities, and Pee Wee Mining Company was solely responsible for the total disability. Pee Wee Mining Company appealed, contesting the trial judge's refusal to grant credit for McKamey's previous 60% disability award under § 50-1007 T. C.A. The appellate court upheld the trial court's decision, deeming the credit provision of the statute vague, potentially unconstitutional, and inconsistent with the liberal construction of workmen’s compensation law, thereby affirming the initial judgment.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.